the need for clear action against transphobia April 16, 2025 9:13 AM Subscribe
This is a post to discuss the moderator actions in this recent FPP.
Yesterday, this post was visited by a user (named in the post) who has a history of posting blatantly, unequivocally transphobic comments that go against the guidelines of conduct of this site. I won't go into why this is but I believe they have previously made their stance on transgender issues very clear. They also have a transphobic dog whistle proudly displayed in the user text on their profile.
However, it's clear that despite the user posting inflammatory comments, the mod on duty didn't bother to click on their profile to check their history. Why?
The mod team has issued a week-long ban to this user while the team "discusses their comments". My questions to the mod team are as follows:
Why is this "discussion" necessary? This user is bringing transphobic hate speech onto the site. Why is the response anything less than "enjoy your permaban"?
If the mods are supposedly "on [our] side" as trans users of the site, why is there any question of what to do in this case?
Is this an issue with moderator confidence in policing transphobia? Or training? Do the mod team have trouble recognising transphobic language? Or is this an attempt to make sure the site is a place for centrist "both sides" thinking, where trans users are expected to tolerate and ignore people who fundamentally disagree with our rights as human beings?
Will we be expected to have to share the site with this person again, or not?
I will note that there was much less hesitation about issuing a completely unnecessary one day ban to a member for "sexist language" in response to the news item in the post, which was allowed to remain "to make it clear what has occurred", while the transphobic comments have been wiped from the profile of the user who made them.
I believe the mod response to these comments was unnecessarily clumsy and punitive against users who were trying to flag the issues with this user. There was no need, imo, to publicly scold users who were drawing attention to hate speech on the site. There is a need for clear, decisive action against hate speech, especially in this moment in time. This shouldn't be as difficult as it feels.
Yesterday, this post was visited by a user (named in the post) who has a history of posting blatantly, unequivocally transphobic comments that go against the guidelines of conduct of this site. I won't go into why this is but I believe they have previously made their stance on transgender issues very clear. They also have a transphobic dog whistle proudly displayed in the user text on their profile.
However, it's clear that despite the user posting inflammatory comments, the mod on duty didn't bother to click on their profile to check their history. Why?
The mod team has issued a week-long ban to this user while the team "discusses their comments". My questions to the mod team are as follows:
Why is this "discussion" necessary? This user is bringing transphobic hate speech onto the site. Why is the response anything less than "enjoy your permaban"?
If the mods are supposedly "on [our] side" as trans users of the site, why is there any question of what to do in this case?
Is this an issue with moderator confidence in policing transphobia? Or training? Do the mod team have trouble recognising transphobic language? Or is this an attempt to make sure the site is a place for centrist "both sides" thinking, where trans users are expected to tolerate and ignore people who fundamentally disagree with our rights as human beings?
Will we be expected to have to share the site with this person again, or not?
I will note that there was much less hesitation about issuing a completely unnecessary one day ban to a member for "sexist language" in response to the news item in the post, which was allowed to remain "to make it clear what has occurred", while the transphobic comments have been wiped from the profile of the user who made them.
I believe the mod response to these comments was unnecessarily clumsy and punitive against users who were trying to flag the issues with this user. There was no need, imo, to publicly scold users who were drawing attention to hate speech on the site. There is a need for clear, decisive action against hate speech, especially in this moment in time. This shouldn't be as difficult as it feels.
I agree on all points here (shouldn't be a surprise, as I was the user who got scolded by the mods for voicing my objection to the rancid bullshit that CyberSlug Labs was bringing to the site).
Transphobia needs to be grounds for an immediate and irreversible ban. Nothing less will do.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:30 AM on April 16 [25 favorites]
Transphobia needs to be grounds for an immediate and irreversible ban. Nothing less will do.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:30 AM on April 16 [25 favorites]
Yuuuuuuup. I don't want to share this site with transphobes and yet somehow transphobes get a slap on the wrist, while valuable trans members quit the site.
Listen, I understand that for any place that is not backed by VC money and can weather financial storms, the norm seems to be "well any engagement is good!", but transphobic content, racist content, sexist content, will never be worth it.
posted by Kitteh at 9:30 AM on April 16 [20 favorites]
Listen, I understand that for any place that is not backed by VC money and can weather financial storms, the norm seems to be "well any engagement is good!", but transphobic content, racist content, sexist content, will never be worth it.
posted by Kitteh at 9:30 AM on April 16 [20 favorites]
"well any engagement is good!"
That scene in the Truman Show where Laura Linney does an ad read for Mococa Brand Cocoa alone in the kitchen when Truman is having a breakdown. Who are you talking to???? What's this engagement for???????? It's just us! And we're TELLING YOU we don't want to have that kind of engagement here!
posted by phunniemee at 9:35 AM on April 16 [11 favorites]
That scene in the Truman Show where Laura Linney does an ad read for Mococa Brand Cocoa alone in the kitchen when Truman is having a breakdown. Who are you talking to???? What's this engagement for???????? It's just us! And we're TELLING YOU we don't want to have that kind of engagement here!
posted by phunniemee at 9:35 AM on April 16 [11 favorites]
And if you're not going to ban the people who repeatedly come into threads to say transphobic things, then at least stop deleting/memory holing their content. Let everyone see and keep it on record so everyone will know. It does no one any favors to let bad actors blithely traipse back into a thread where some people may think there's a chance of having a reasonable conversation with them to win them over to the side of the good, when history would clearly show they're only here to troll.
posted by phunniemee at 9:37 AM on April 16 [36 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 9:37 AM on April 16 [36 favorites]
I also feel the need to point out that this is what, the second time in two weeks that I've flagged blatant transphobia only to have the mods quietly sweep it under the rug and let the poster continue on the site. I noted back then that the transphobes never seem to get banned. And now this again.
The mods seem absolutely committed to keeping transphobes around with a slap on the wrist.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:39 AM on April 16 [14 favorites]
The mods seem absolutely committed to keeping transphobes around with a slap on the wrist.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:39 AM on April 16 [14 favorites]
phunniemee: "And if you're not going to ban the people who repeatedly come into threads to say transphobic things, then at least stop deleting/memory holing their content."
This would be a great case for the (repeatedly discussed) details tag/hidden comment alternative. IIRC the current mod stance is that it's too complex to integrate automatically into the site, but we already know that mods can edit user comments if they need to, so why not restore the comments under a details tag and warning for transphobia, for necessary context.
posted by fight or flight at 9:41 AM on April 16 [9 favorites]
This would be a great case for the (repeatedly discussed) details tag/hidden comment alternative. IIRC the current mod stance is that it's too complex to integrate automatically into the site, but we already know that mods can edit user comments if they need to, so why not restore the comments under a details tag and warning for transphobia, for necessary context.
posted by fight or flight at 9:41 AM on April 16 [9 favorites]
Calling someone a bitch and a hag is sexist language, yes. Not sure why that's in quotes in your post.
posted by kbanas at 9:41 AM on April 16
posted by kbanas at 9:41 AM on April 16
kbanas: "Not sure why that's in quotes in your post."
It's quoting the mod warning.
posted by fight or flight at 9:43 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
It's quoting the mod warning.
posted by fight or flight at 9:43 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
kbanas: "Calling someone a bitch and a hag is sexist language, yes. Not sure why that's in quotes in your post."
"Sexist language" is a direct quote characterization of that content by a mod. Why was this sexist language treated differently than the sexist language used by the slug person? Trans sexist language LITERALLY IS sexist language!
posted by phunniemee at 9:44 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
"Sexist language" is a direct quote characterization of that content by a mod. Why was this sexist language treated differently than the sexist language used by the slug person? Trans sexist language LITERALLY IS sexist language!
posted by phunniemee at 9:44 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
And in the interests of transparency, here are screenshots I took of the offending comment from CyberSlug Labs, and of their profile. Both of which display very, very obvious hate-speech against trans people.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:46 AM on April 16 [11 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:46 AM on April 16 [11 favorites]
Yeah, that's not "take a time out and think about what you did" kind of speech. That's "find somewhere else to be, motherfucker, we don't allow that bullshit here" speech.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:48 AM on April 16 [20 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:48 AM on April 16 [20 favorites]
Maybe the real Nazi Bar was the Metafilter we made along the way
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:50 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:50 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
Mod note: Transphobia needs to be grounds for an immediate and irreversible ban. Nothing less will do.
Yes, a full ban is in order. Transphobia has no place here. Period. The temporary ban while the moderation team discussed the issue was a decision to stop the user right there and allow some time for us to discuss collectively, not because we need to decide our stance when it comet to transphobic content, but because we take full ban seriously and discuss them together as a team.
posted by loup (staff) at 9:51 AM on April 16 [14 favorites]
Yes, a full ban is in order. Transphobia has no place here. Period. The temporary ban while the moderation team discussed the issue was a decision to stop the user right there and allow some time for us to discuss collectively, not because we need to decide our stance when it comet to transphobic content, but because we take full ban seriously and discuss them together as a team.
posted by loup (staff) at 9:51 AM on April 16 [14 favorites]
Oh, and in case anyone was unclear about the "scolding": I told CyberSlug to go fuck themselves, but my comments were deleted and I was told to chill out by the mods for being uncivil.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:52 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:52 AM on April 16 [8 favorites]
@loup, the poster of the previous transphobic comment I flagged, were they banned? If not, why not?
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:53 AM on April 16 [2 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:53 AM on April 16 [2 favorites]
Were the mods actually planning to ban this user before this metatalk post went up?
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:53 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 9:53 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Mod note: Were the mods actually planning to ban this user before this MetaTalk post went up?
Yes, totally. I met with Brandon this morning and we agreed to ban them for good.
posted by loup (staff) at 10:00 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
Yes, totally. I met with Brandon this morning and we agreed to ban them for good.
posted by loup (staff) at 10:00 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
Seems the previous transphobe from this thread had not been banned.
So which is it, mods?
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:00 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
So which is it, mods?
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:00 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
loup: "Yes, a full ban is in order. Transphobia has no place here. Period."
This is good to hear, thank you. I think in the future you guys shouldn't be hesitant to make it clear that a full ban is what's going to happen, it helps to reassure trans users that you have our backs. Sometimes a "nope, not going to happen, out the airlock with you" is just what's needed.
posted by fight or flight at 10:04 AM on April 16 [10 favorites]
This is good to hear, thank you. I think in the future you guys shouldn't be hesitant to make it clear that a full ban is what's going to happen, it helps to reassure trans users that you have our backs. Sometimes a "nope, not going to happen, out the airlock with you" is just what's needed.
posted by fight or flight at 10:04 AM on April 16 [10 favorites]
Is there a reason their profile isn't showing as banned yet?
posted by ambrosen at 10:05 AM on April 16 [3 favorites]
posted by ambrosen at 10:05 AM on April 16 [3 favorites]
I think that when it is pretty clear that someone comes into a trans-related thread to make insulting terf-ish points, they should be banned. That's not the same as having a normal conversation and popping out with something ignorant, it's proactively thinking, "this thread about trans people needs a comment pointing out [terf points]". Metafilter does not have threads where we chat idly about "ROGD, is it a thing" - there is no situation where popping in to add terf talking points to a thread is somehow part of a discussion.
I also think that there needs to be a log. Think about how sexual harassment is defined - it can be severe OR pervasive, and I think that the mods should be able to determine whether a comment is severe enough for immediate ban or whether there is a pervasive enough history (of things that, taken individually, might be mistakes, ignorance, personal trauma, etc) to permaban.
I personally think that ANY of the comments june_dodecahedron was responding to (except possibly for the "my personal experience was bad and I am making a bad comment seemingly out of personal trauma" comment) are grounds for immediate ban. They are really egregious, and absent an immediate total retraction and apology should get the user kicked off the site. Those were hostile comments.
posted by Frowner at 10:10 AM on April 16 [16 favorites]
I also think that there needs to be a log. Think about how sexual harassment is defined - it can be severe OR pervasive, and I think that the mods should be able to determine whether a comment is severe enough for immediate ban or whether there is a pervasive enough history (of things that, taken individually, might be mistakes, ignorance, personal trauma, etc) to permaban.
I personally think that ANY of the comments june_dodecahedron was responding to (except possibly for the "my personal experience was bad and I am making a bad comment seemingly out of personal trauma" comment) are grounds for immediate ban. They are really egregious, and absent an immediate total retraction and apology should get the user kicked off the site. Those were hostile comments.
posted by Frowner at 10:10 AM on April 16 [16 favorites]
Has a full tribunal of mod consensus always been required for permabans? Because that's certainly some interesting context for other decisions.
posted by phunniemee at 10:22 AM on April 16 [12 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 10:22 AM on April 16 [12 favorites]
What I would like to see is for the banning for egregious behaviour to be immediate (as far as mod attention permits), and the discussion about whether the ban should be permanent or time limited to come later. So much damage can be done in mere minutes.
It's like, you get an instant time-out if you take a shit on the floor. Maybe you have a reason for taking a shit on the floor (some kind of medical problem I guess), but unless you can justify it and atone for it, you don't get access to the floor again.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:24 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
It's like, you get an instant time-out if you take a shit on the floor. Maybe you have a reason for taking a shit on the floor (some kind of medical problem I guess), but unless you can justify it and atone for it, you don't get access to the floor again.
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:24 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
Metafilter: some kind of medical problem I guess
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:25 AM on April 16 [3 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:25 AM on April 16 [3 favorites]
Mod note: Were the mods actually planning to ban this user before this metatalk post went up?
Yep.
We aim to avoid having one person ban a member with no conversation with other mods so that no person is dispensing bans as they see fit. So I gave CyberSlug Labs a week off to prevent them from saying anything else on the site, emailed them why there getting the temp ban, and that a permanent ban was being discussed.
I was pretty sure the other mods would agree with the ban, just wanted to touch bases with them to get that full agreement. It was a pretty short conversation.
Yes an argument could made that I should have just gone ahead and banned them, but again, it's important that we're not out here being total cowboys when banning people. Plus I was rocking a helluva head cold and felt a second opinion wouldn't hurt anything as long as CyberSlub Labs could no long post in the meantime.
june_dodecahedron: "@loup, the poster of the previous transphobic comment I flagged, were they banned? If not, why not?"
That user, The Master and Margarita Mix, has now been banned.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:28 AM on April 16 [16 favorites]
Yep.
We aim to avoid having one person ban a member with no conversation with other mods so that no person is dispensing bans as they see fit. So I gave CyberSlug Labs a week off to prevent them from saying anything else on the site, emailed them why there getting the temp ban, and that a permanent ban was being discussed.
I was pretty sure the other mods would agree with the ban, just wanted to touch bases with them to get that full agreement. It was a pretty short conversation.
Yes an argument could made that I should have just gone ahead and banned them, but again, it's important that we're not out here being total cowboys when banning people. Plus I was rocking a helluva head cold and felt a second opinion wouldn't hurt anything as long as CyberSlub Labs could no long post in the meantime.
june_dodecahedron: "@loup, the poster of the previous transphobic comment I flagged, were they banned? If not, why not?"
That user, The Master and Margarita Mix, has now been banned.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:28 AM on April 16 [16 favorites]
That user, The Master and Margarita Mix, has now been banned.
Had that ban been discussed prior to this thread?
posted by mittens at 10:30 AM on April 16 [9 favorites]
Had that ban been discussed prior to this thread?
posted by mittens at 10:30 AM on April 16 [9 favorites]
So, I found the thread after the transphobic comment was deleted and checked CyberSlug Labs profile. I recall thinking that there was nothing in there (neither the profile itself nor the activity) that came across as offensive. (A side result of deleting bad comments: the user's slate appears clean.)
I know that it's considered bad form to ask members of a minority to explain micro-agressions, but if someone is nevertheless willing to explain, I'd appreciate it and promise to use my newfound knowledge well. (Searching online for "born wrong" "child abuse" didn't help.)
If not, I hope it's somehow useful to know that that particular dog whistle sadly still manages to fly under the radar of some well-meaning less-informed people.
(To be clear, I am not objecting to the ban, which seems justified based on the comment in the thread alone.)
posted by demi-octopus at 10:31 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
I know that it's considered bad form to ask members of a minority to explain micro-agressions, but if someone is nevertheless willing to explain, I'd appreciate it and promise to use my newfound knowledge well. (Searching online for "born wrong" "child abuse" didn't help.)
If not, I hope it's somehow useful to know that that particular dog whistle sadly still manages to fly under the radar of some well-meaning less-informed people.
(To be clear, I am not objecting to the ban, which seems justified based on the comment in the thread alone.)
posted by demi-octopus at 10:31 AM on April 16 [6 favorites]
@demi-octopus: fair question! that bit of their profile is the whole "they're forcing gay kids to be trans" conspiracy theory. The bullshit narrative goes that trans people are not a naturally occurring phenomenon, but instead a product of a cabal of evil doctors conspiring to somehow stop gay people from being gay by instead forcing them to become trans.
Edit: and/or "trans people are just confused, and thus need to be prevented from transition"
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:34 AM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Edit: and/or "trans people are just confused, and thus need to be prevented from transition"
posted by june_dodecahedron at 10:34 AM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Yes an argument could made that I should have just gone ahead and banned them
The mod note said:
No harm would have been done, and much good will could have been saved, if the mod note instead said:
The mod note said:
CyberSlug Labs, take the week off while the moderation team discusses your comments.
In the meantime, it is suggested that you seriously rethink your participation on the site, your comments were transphobic because they blamed child predators and social media for creating trans people. Completely unacceptable.
This note has been emailed to CyberSlug Labs.
No harm would have been done, and much good will could have been saved, if the mod note instead said:
Permanent bans require input from multiple members of staff. CyberSlug Labs is on time out until the rest of the mod team can weigh in, at which point they will be permanently banned.posted by phunniemee at 10:37 AM on April 16 [27 favorites]
CyberSlug Labs, your comments were transphobic because they blamed child predators and social media for creating trans people. Completely unacceptable.
This note has been emailed to CyberSlug Labs.
I don't want to distract from this case, the answer to which was obvious (a ban was in order here). But I would like to nth that we should improve how we handle deleted offensive comments, particularly if the user is granted the leeway to stay.
I don't think it should be up to a handful of users to keep mental lists of who is regularly deleted for the same bullshit. In fact, if the site left more of a trail when comments are deleted, it seems clear bad actors wouldn't last as long anyway.
The repetition of this is irritating:
User: [says awful __________-ist shit]
SITE BLOWUP
Other users: Yeah, they've said similar shit like 15x times, it's just all deleted so it's like it never happened.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:41 AM on April 16 [30 favorites]
I don't think it should be up to a handful of users to keep mental lists of who is regularly deleted for the same bullshit. In fact, if the site left more of a trail when comments are deleted, it seems clear bad actors wouldn't last as long anyway.
The repetition of this is irritating:
User: [says awful __________-ist shit]
SITE BLOWUP
Other users: Yeah, they've said similar shit like 15x times, it's just all deleted so it's like it never happened.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:41 AM on April 16 [30 favorites]
I think "24 hour ban from mod on duty, pending discussion on permanent ban by mod team" is a reasonable policy/procedure for situations of this nature, and I'm glad that is being spelled out here.
Agree with phunniemee's mod note suggestion, with the caveat that "at which point they will be permanently banned" isn't up to the individual mod, it sounds like? so that should read something more like "at which point we will discuss permanent ban" or "at which point I will advocate for a permanent ban".
Boilerplate/template mod notes for this sort of thing would probably be helpful both to mods and to the community. When mods see permaban-worthy things like this, they should easily be able to post a default note explaining the review process rather than having to write a bespoke mod note on the fly.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:46 AM on April 16 [21 favorites]
Agree with phunniemee's mod note suggestion, with the caveat that "at which point they will be permanently banned" isn't up to the individual mod, it sounds like? so that should read something more like "at which point we will discuss permanent ban" or "at which point I will advocate for a permanent ban".
Boilerplate/template mod notes for this sort of thing would probably be helpful both to mods and to the community. When mods see permaban-worthy things like this, they should easily be able to post a default note explaining the review process rather than having to write a bespoke mod note on the fly.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:46 AM on April 16 [21 favorites]
We aim to avoid having one person ban a member with no conversation with other mods so that no person is dispensing bans as they see fit
This makes me uncomfortable. If there is a clear bright-line rule against transphobic comments, why is any consultation needed? This is the entire reason to have such simple and actionable rules. A rules-based, fence-based policy is exactly what prevents a “cowboy” situation. This ban should have been simple, straightforward and and immediate.
Otherwise, why have any rules, guideline or critters at all? Treating every rules-violation incident as subjective and up for debate brings us right back to the mushy situation of MeFi’s past.
posted by Miko at 10:46 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
This makes me uncomfortable. If there is a clear bright-line rule against transphobic comments, why is any consultation needed? This is the entire reason to have such simple and actionable rules. A rules-based, fence-based policy is exactly what prevents a “cowboy” situation. This ban should have been simple, straightforward and and immediate.
Otherwise, why have any rules, guideline or critters at all? Treating every rules-violation incident as subjective and up for debate brings us right back to the mushy situation of MeFi’s past.
posted by Miko at 10:46 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
If there is a clear bright-line rule against transphobic comments
Is there one? Thinking about fight or flight's comment about training--and demi-octopus' question--would this comment have been recognized as rule-breaking if it hadn't been flagged and if june_dodecahedron had not taken pains to point it out?
I don't know if I'm asking this the right way, but how do you have a rule if the enforcers do not seem clear on what it's a rule about?
posted by mittens at 10:55 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Is there one? Thinking about fight or flight's comment about training--and demi-octopus' question--would this comment have been recognized as rule-breaking if it hadn't been flagged and if june_dodecahedron had not taken pains to point it out?
I don't know if I'm asking this the right way, but how do you have a rule if the enforcers do not seem clear on what it's a rule about?
posted by mittens at 10:55 AM on April 16 [7 favorites]
This makes me uncomfortable. If there is a clear bright-line rule against transphobic comments, why is any consultation needed? This is the entire reason to have such simple and actionable rules. A rules-based, fence-based policy is exactly what prevents a “cowboy” situation. This ban should have been simple, straightforward and and immediate.
The volume of comments from MeFites questioning the judgement of mods is a reason to require discussion on any permaban decisions. I think the relatively fast action to call attention to the comment/user in question, the mod note--though imperfect according to a few here--was adequate and I hope mods take the comments here to consider a next time, but I don't think instant permabans as per one mod's decision is warranted.
If the offending comments are noted and the user is prevented from posting further, what is 24-48 hrs to confirm the permaban?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:18 AM on April 16 [23 favorites]
The volume of comments from MeFites questioning the judgement of mods is a reason to require discussion on any permaban decisions. I think the relatively fast action to call attention to the comment/user in question, the mod note--though imperfect according to a few here--was adequate and I hope mods take the comments here to consider a next time, but I don't think instant permabans as per one mod's decision is warranted.
If the offending comments are noted and the user is prevented from posting further, what is 24-48 hrs to confirm the permaban?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:18 AM on April 16 [23 favorites]
As someone said upthread, it'd be better to note in the mod response that a permaban is being discussed, just to reassure folks that a temporary ban will not be the end of it. Maybe with a link to some policy page explaining the logic behind the group decision when permabanning, which makes sense to me to have a consistent policy of everyone has to turn the key at the same time.
posted by kokaku at 11:35 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
posted by kokaku at 11:35 AM on April 16 [4 favorites]
Yeah, I don't like the idea of one mod being able to unilaterally impose a permaban, except in the case of like spammers and whatnot.
Like, the consensus on this particular situation is that it's a pretty cut-and-dried violation that warrants permabanning, but there are always going to be edge cases -- rather than having whichever mod is on duty be the one determining whether they can do this on their own authority or should take it to the mod team, it makes sense to me to always do a temp ban and then run it by the rest of the mods to make the formal decision.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:45 AM on April 16 [13 favorites]
Like, the consensus on this particular situation is that it's a pretty cut-and-dried violation that warrants permabanning, but there are always going to be edge cases -- rather than having whichever mod is on duty be the one determining whether they can do this on their own authority or should take it to the mod team, it makes sense to me to always do a temp ban and then run it by the rest of the mods to make the formal decision.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:45 AM on April 16 [13 favorites]
If there was a clear published policy around how infractions should be handled, then mod notes like this one could just link to the policy to explain the consequences, and save having to come up with wording (or worse, policy) on the fly during a tense situation in which there may well already be misunderstandings.
Given the history of extremely contentious bans, it seems extremely sensible to have a "cooling off" / information gathering period and a cross check with another staff member before permabans get enacted.
posted by quacks like a duck at 12:08 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Given the history of extremely contentious bans, it seems extremely sensible to have a "cooling off" / information gathering period and a cross check with another staff member before permabans get enacted.
posted by quacks like a duck at 12:08 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
As the poster of the original post that set this off, I want to say a couple things.
1) I MeMailed june_dodecohedron about what QuickSlug Labs said.
2) I also MeMailed QuickSlug Labs offering to discuss things with them.
3) my post asking june to stop engaging with QSL was due to my desire to starve the post of air, because I wanted to focus on the topic at hand. if I had seen QSL's full posts on the thread, I would probably have flagged it and MeMailed the mod team about it, in the hopes that at least there was action taken.
4) I don't care who it pisses off, if I see some trans-related news and no one has gotten there yet, I will do a post about it, and the transphobes can simmer and contact me directly.
5) Mambo number.
posted by mephron at 12:13 PM on April 16 [19 favorites]
1) I MeMailed june_dodecohedron about what QuickSlug Labs said.
2) I also MeMailed QuickSlug Labs offering to discuss things with them.
3) my post asking june to stop engaging with QSL was due to my desire to starve the post of air, because I wanted to focus on the topic at hand. if I had seen QSL's full posts on the thread, I would probably have flagged it and MeMailed the mod team about it, in the hopes that at least there was action taken.
4) I don't care who it pisses off, if I see some trans-related news and no one has gotten there yet, I will do a post about it, and the transphobes can simmer and contact me directly.
5) Mambo number.
posted by mephron at 12:13 PM on April 16 [19 favorites]
I agree that a temporary ban leading to a permanent ban is the right approach, for reasons of not having mods just cowboy that stuff, but I also caution the mod team on how that debate, if there is one, is handled. Finding edge cases and tiptoeing just up to the line is one of the ways how transphobes, (and right wing trolls in general) worm their way in and erode community standards, and that kind of behavior usually only benefits from a long debate over if it's "bad enough". If you're having the debate, the number of cases where it's not bad enough are vanishingly small, effectively zero.
When we have the tech in place, I'd also suggest publishing the temp ban and pending perma-ban into the upcoming moderation log as well. We really, really need visibility into how, and how many of the temp bans don't lead to perma bans on this subject, given how much of an issue properly handling transphobic comments has been on mefi.
posted by mrgoat at 12:33 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
When we have the tech in place, I'd also suggest publishing the temp ban and pending perma-ban into the upcoming moderation log as well. We really, really need visibility into how, and how many of the temp bans don't lead to perma bans on this subject, given how much of an issue properly handling transphobic comments has been on mefi.
posted by mrgoat at 12:33 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
I am:
1) Really glad we're having this discussion on how to improve things.
2) Really glad I didn't have to see whatever QSL posted, because mods took it down fast enough.
3) Still able to feel safe enough on this site to post openly about my experience as a woman who is trans.
Keep it up, folks. Keep maintaining and improving standards to protect marginalized groups.
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 12:40 PM on April 16 [21 favorites]
1) Really glad we're having this discussion on how to improve things.
2) Really glad I didn't have to see whatever QSL posted, because mods took it down fast enough.
3) Still able to feel safe enough on this site to post openly about my experience as a woman who is trans.
Keep it up, folks. Keep maintaining and improving standards to protect marginalized groups.
posted by Flight Hardware, do not touch at 12:40 PM on April 16 [21 favorites]
And I learned a thing today!
(Not just this specific dog whistle, but a flaw in my reasoning: just because someone is not anti-gay doesn't mean they can't be hateful in other ways.)
posted by demi-octopus at 12:48 PM on April 16 [4 favorites]
(Not just this specific dog whistle, but a flaw in my reasoning: just because someone is not anti-gay doesn't mean they can't be hateful in other ways.)
posted by demi-octopus at 12:48 PM on April 16 [4 favorites]
I'm also glad this discussion is happening, but I hope we can get to a place where I don't feel I need to keep receipts and screenshots and repeatedly cajole the mods into doing the right thing. Master and Margarita Mix should have been banned weeks ago, not when I pestered the mods about it for the nth time. CyberSlug should have been banned immediately without this needing to become yet another metatalk.
Mods, please stop making trans people do the work you should be doing.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:48 PM on April 16 [24 favorites]
Mods, please stop making trans people do the work you should be doing.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:48 PM on April 16 [24 favorites]
i haven't said this before because i find it largely performative when others do it but i'll say it now:
i've been a member here for twenty years and i'm pretty close to deleting my account at this point. the way trans threads on mefi go sucks. i don't want to see another cis person moderate a thread like this because they clearly aren't up to it.
in case my comment in the thread gets deleted, here it is and i stand by it:
> i'm perfectly okay bringing transphobes into the light where we can all see them. "don't derail the thread about transphobia by exposing transphobic members" is not the good moderation you think it is.
posted by secret about box at 12:58 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
i've been a member here for twenty years and i'm pretty close to deleting my account at this point. the way trans threads on mefi go sucks. i don't want to see another cis person moderate a thread like this because they clearly aren't up to it.
in case my comment in the thread gets deleted, here it is and i stand by it:
> i'm perfectly okay bringing transphobes into the light where we can all see them. "don't derail the thread about transphobia by exposing transphobic members" is not the good moderation you think it is.
posted by secret about box at 12:58 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
i should be clearer.
i do not want to fuck with a website whose moderation shuts down trans people's attempts at exposing transphobes in front of everyone. if anything, you should thank us when we do it.
posted by secret about box at 1:07 PM on April 16 [19 favorites]
i do not want to fuck with a website whose moderation shuts down trans people's attempts at exposing transphobes in front of everyone. if anything, you should thank us when we do it.
posted by secret about box at 1:07 PM on April 16 [19 favorites]
Brandon Blatcher, do you still stand by your comment that told june_dodecahedron to chill?
posted by ftrtts at 1:08 PM on April 16 [8 favorites]
posted by ftrtts at 1:08 PM on April 16 [8 favorites]
We can always improve as a community, the mods can always improve how they respond, I just don't see how this example is a colossal failure by this community and/or the mods. I could be missing something, but this MeTa could serve to capture specific points so we can say: today, from now on, here is how we would do things differently.
Thanks to june_dodecahedron we have the screenshot of CSL's comment, timestamped 1:18
The mod (travelingthyme) deletes the comment and response at 1:24, and leaves a mod note. The mod note could be worded more forcefully?
OP (mephron) is commenting at 1:47 asking to take the issue of the transphobic comment and anger relating to that to a MeTa, and at 1:55 the mod (travelingthyme) is making an appeal to refocus the thread
The mod (Brandon Blatcher) comes in at 3:28 to give CSL the week off, and noting that the mods would be discussing the case, and explicitly calling out that CSL made a transphobic comment and this goes against site rules. The mod (BB) also leaves a mod note re: removal of comments from june_dodecahedron and a warning not to derail
In some details this could be better, but is this a complete failure from the entire community and mods?
posted by ginger.beef at 2:20 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
Thanks to june_dodecahedron we have the screenshot of CSL's comment, timestamped 1:18
The mod (travelingthyme) deletes the comment and response at 1:24, and leaves a mod note. The mod note could be worded more forcefully?
OP (mephron) is commenting at 1:47 asking to take the issue of the transphobic comment and anger relating to that to a MeTa, and at 1:55 the mod (travelingthyme) is making an appeal to refocus the thread
The mod (Brandon Blatcher) comes in at 3:28 to give CSL the week off, and noting that the mods would be discussing the case, and explicitly calling out that CSL made a transphobic comment and this goes against site rules. The mod (BB) also leaves a mod note re: removal of comments from june_dodecahedron and a warning not to derail
In some details this could be better, but is this a complete failure from the entire community and mods?
posted by ginger.beef at 2:20 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
Yes
posted by ftrtts at 2:54 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
posted by ftrtts at 2:54 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
In some details this could be better, but is this a complete failure from the entire community and mods?
Complete failure? I don't think so. A complete failure would be not issuing a perma-ban. (Leaving the comment up or merely issuing a timeout would be... what's less than complete failure? That.) I can think of several ways to handle it better though, so here's my first draft, subject to suggestions, on what I would consider a good response.
Offending comment is posted. Offending comment is reported, and the first mod on the scene says, yeah, this violates policy. Now, here's the first big place I think we can do better. The mod note should not be a bespoke "hey, knock it off, you're getting a ban", it should be an automatic "[USER]'s comment deleted. Reason: [TRANSPHOBIC CONTENT]( Policy violation:link to content policy) by [MODERATOR NAME] at [DATETIME], automatic 7-day ban pending additional mod review (link to moderation log)".
Name the offender, get the comment out, put the ban in place to stop the derail bleeding, show where people can go if they want to review the mod actions.
Next: Mods have a little time to review, double-check that we're not permabanning someone on a misclick or something. Mods, in some fashion that is recorded in the mod log, say "Yes, this breaks the content policy, permaban instituted." This should not take long, maybe enough time for a couple more mods to come online for their shifts. Ban done. If mods are split on the decision, I goddamn wanna know why. If mods are split, or there's no decision made? I think the ban goes into effect.
Weaknesses I can see at a cursory level: First: Mod availability is neither instant, nor infinite. People will react to the banned comment in ways that don't break policy, but we would still need a good, transparent way to clean up some of the derails. This is a problem now, though, so. Second: Less detailed information in the thread about why a comment was deleted. Personally, I think this is fine, and offload further explanation to a mod log.
posted by mrgoat at 3:41 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Complete failure? I don't think so. A complete failure would be not issuing a perma-ban. (Leaving the comment up or merely issuing a timeout would be... what's less than complete failure? That.) I can think of several ways to handle it better though, so here's my first draft, subject to suggestions, on what I would consider a good response.
Offending comment is posted. Offending comment is reported, and the first mod on the scene says, yeah, this violates policy. Now, here's the first big place I think we can do better. The mod note should not be a bespoke "hey, knock it off, you're getting a ban", it should be an automatic "[USER]'s comment deleted. Reason: [TRANSPHOBIC CONTENT]( Policy violation:link to content policy) by [MODERATOR NAME] at [DATETIME], automatic 7-day ban pending additional mod review (link to moderation log)".
Name the offender, get the comment out, put the ban in place to stop the derail bleeding, show where people can go if they want to review the mod actions.
Next: Mods have a little time to review, double-check that we're not permabanning someone on a misclick or something. Mods, in some fashion that is recorded in the mod log, say "Yes, this breaks the content policy, permaban instituted." This should not take long, maybe enough time for a couple more mods to come online for their shifts. Ban done. If mods are split on the decision, I goddamn wanna know why. If mods are split, or there's no decision made? I think the ban goes into effect.
Weaknesses I can see at a cursory level: First: Mod availability is neither instant, nor infinite. People will react to the banned comment in ways that don't break policy, but we would still need a good, transparent way to clean up some of the derails. This is a problem now, though, so. Second: Less detailed information in the thread about why a comment was deleted. Personally, I think this is fine, and offload further explanation to a mod log.
posted by mrgoat at 3:41 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
The mod note should not be a bespoke "hey, knock it off, you're getting a ban", it should be an automatic "[USER]'s comment deleted. Reason: [TRANSPHOBIC CONTENT]( Policy violation:link to content policy) by [MODERATOR NAME] at [DATETIME], automatic 7-day ban pending additional mod review (link to moderation log)"
Makes me think of this. [Sensitive content warning, this is a single image link to a blockbuster movie from the 1980s.]
posted by phunniemee at 3:58 PM on April 16 [3 favorites]
Makes me think of this. [Sensitive content warning, this is a single image link to a blockbuster movie from the 1980s.]
posted by phunniemee at 3:58 PM on April 16 [3 favorites]
Mod note: ftrtts: "Brandon Blatcher, do you still stand by your comment that told june_dodecahedron to chill?"
Yes, I stand by my comment, made in moderator role, that told june_dodechedron to stop telling other people to fuck off. That is a rule on the site, has been for a while.
The feeling and desire to say that is understandable, but we do want to members to avoid deciding who deserves to be told to fuck off. 'Cause that tends to slide down to personal interactions ("you don't like my comment? Well, F off or F you!") so we tend to discourage that anywhere on the site.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:05 PM on April 16 [6 favorites]
Yes, I stand by my comment, made in moderator role, that told june_dodechedron to stop telling other people to fuck off. That is a rule on the site, has been for a while.
The feeling and desire to say that is understandable, but we do want to members to avoid deciding who deserves to be told to fuck off. 'Cause that tends to slide down to personal interactions ("you don't like my comment? Well, F off or F you!") so we tend to discourage that anywhere on the site.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:05 PM on April 16 [6 favorites]
Yes, I stand by my comment, made in moderator role, that told june_dodechedron to stop telling other people to fuck off. That is a rule on the site, has been for a while.
This is again lacking in seeing context. If a person makes a comment that warrants a permanent ban from the site, other users telling them to fuck off is understandable, expected, and shouldn't lead to any sort of repercussions. If it deserves a ban, it deserves swearing. This should be a pretty obvious exception to the rule.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 4:17 PM on April 16 [18 favorites]
This is again lacking in seeing context. If a person makes a comment that warrants a permanent ban from the site, other users telling them to fuck off is understandable, expected, and shouldn't lead to any sort of repercussions. If it deserves a ban, it deserves swearing. This should be a pretty obvious exception to the rule.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 4:17 PM on April 16 [18 favorites]
Pretty sure they were referring to this part, mate. The part that was an entirely separate comment from the fuckoff and the one that you seemed to be referring to in your mod note, given that your mod note immediately followed your description of the non-fuckoff comment they made.
Another comment removed for pulling information from a user's profile into the thread and demanding a user be banned.
june_dodecahedron, you absolutely need to chill on these types of derails in this thread.
posted by phunniemee at 4:17 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Another comment removed for pulling information from a user's profile into the thread and demanding a user be banned.
june_dodecahedron, you absolutely need to chill on these types of derails in this thread.
posted by phunniemee at 4:17 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Oh no, users pointing out transphobia in profiles! Better deploy the rules to make sure that never happens again.
posted by sagc at 4:32 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
posted by sagc at 4:32 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
Yeah that part I don't get. The profile was available for all to see, drawing attention to it is fine.
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:35 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:35 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
ginger.beef: I'm sorry; are you saying that I, the original poster (who is trans), was somehow wrong in asking that the discussion be refocused? I wasn't trying to threadsit or threadshit, but I feel that I should be able to make that request, especially in that situation, instead of going for an elbow from the top rope.
posted by mephron at 5:18 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
posted by mephron at 5:18 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
tiny frying pan: "Yeah that part I don't get. The profile was available for all to see, drawing attention to it is fine.
"
Generally speaking, we don't encourage people to pull things from a member's profile, same as telling another member to fuck off or fuck you.
No one is losing a bunch of sleep over it being done in this situation, but we also do not want to see that happening at all, hence the comment and removal of some content.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:23 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
"
Generally speaking, we don't encourage people to pull things from a member's profile, same as telling another member to fuck off or fuck you.
No one is losing a bunch of sleep over it being done in this situation, but we also do not want to see that happening at all, hence the comment and removal of some content.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:23 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
Had that ban been discussed prior to this thread?
On April 6th The Master and Margarita Mix made the "essentialism"/castration comment, which reminded me that they had made a shitty comment about a month before that. Here's the transphobic part:
It would be helpful to understand if The Master and Margarita Mix did something else to trigger a ban, or if that was how long it took mods to discuss the ban, given they were made aware of at least two transphobic comments on April 6th.
posted by brook horse at 5:28 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
On April 6th The Master and Margarita Mix made the "essentialism"/castration comment, which reminded me that they had made a shitty comment about a month before that. Here's the transphobic part:
- Ditch basically any trans stuff that goes beyond "what a person who transitioned in the 90s and is basically okay with the paradigm of medical transsexualism would be absolutely thrilled to have". I don't even think you have to mandate full medical transition for a lot of legal protections or access to medical care, but it does have to be taken seriously and the movement is in a state of complete overreach and has been for quite some time. Frankly, shrieking about incels when some of the trans stuff has gotten as deranged as it is just strengthens the hand of the incels and anti-feminists.I went back to check if I'd flagged it and I hadn't. I flagged it then and shortly after that got an Me-Mail from Brandon acknowledging the flag. I replied noting it as a concerning pattern. I don't know if a ban was discussed at that time or not but The Master and Margarita Mix last posted on April 14th. So if they were banned it was in the last 48 hours.
It would be helpful to understand if The Master and Margarita Mix did something else to trigger a ban, or if that was how long it took mods to discuss the ban, given they were made aware of at least two transphobic comments on April 6th.
posted by brook horse at 5:28 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
So tempted to put something deeply offensive in my profile, then try to get anyone mentioning it reprimanded.
Brandon, what do you see as the reason behind that rule? Do you think there's a reason behind the rule? Because my understanding is that it's to prevent users bringing private information from non-indexed user pages to indexed post comments. Do we really think "blatant transphobia" is the sort of personal information the rule is intended to protect?
Do you have a different understanding of the motivation for the rule? Do you think it doesn't matter why the rule exists, it just has to be implemented without discretion by the mods?
Do you feel like this is going to make june_dodecahedron feel listened to or acknowledged by the mods, or do you think this might look, from the outside, like yet another example of immediate mod defensiveness and retrenchment in the face of valid criticism? Like, do you see how you're coming off?
posted by sagc at 5:31 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
Brandon, what do you see as the reason behind that rule? Do you think there's a reason behind the rule? Because my understanding is that it's to prevent users bringing private information from non-indexed user pages to indexed post comments. Do we really think "blatant transphobia" is the sort of personal information the rule is intended to protect?
Do you have a different understanding of the motivation for the rule? Do you think it doesn't matter why the rule exists, it just has to be implemented without discretion by the mods?
Do you feel like this is going to make june_dodecahedron feel listened to or acknowledged by the mods, or do you think this might look, from the outside, like yet another example of immediate mod defensiveness and retrenchment in the face of valid criticism? Like, do you see how you're coming off?
posted by sagc at 5:31 PM on April 16 [14 favorites]
mephron, sorry I was unclear
Mostly I don't think this was a total failure of the community. I think the OP can ask to get a thread back on track, I think the mods tried to facilitate that, I think MetaFilter is doing better than failure in this case. I think this MeTa is the space to discuss this stuff and I hope this leads to a better MetaFilter. I think I said as much in the thread you started but I may not have been clear
posted by ginger.beef at 5:34 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
Mostly I don't think this was a total failure of the community. I think the OP can ask to get a thread back on track, I think the mods tried to facilitate that, I think MetaFilter is doing better than failure in this case. I think this MeTa is the space to discuss this stuff and I hope this leads to a better MetaFilter. I think I said as much in the thread you started but I may not have been clear
posted by ginger.beef at 5:34 PM on April 16 [1 favorite]
Mod note: sagc: "or do you think this might look, from the outside, like yet another example of immediate mod defensiveness and retrenchment in the face of valid criticism?"
Two users have been banned and it's been fairly clear it was because of transphobia.
That said, I am seeing users breaking the rules/guidelines with the justification that they are in the right for doing so. I don't think that's exactly wrong, but do believe it's important to note and pump the brakes on members breaking rules/guidelines because they believe it's morally justified, end of story. That's line of thought/feeling is completely understandable, but don't want to encourage members feeling that they're morally justifiable to do this whenever they want.
We're probably gonna disagree about that, which is fine, we'll handle these situations as they come up.
brook horse: "It would be helpful to understand if The Master and Margarita Mix did something else to trigger a ban, or if that was how long it took mods to discuss the ban, given they were made aware of at least two transphobic comments on April 6th."
Previously they had been mention in discussions about someone to keep an eye on. When june_dodecahedron brought up their comments this afternoon, I went through their comments again, thought "Yes, it's time for ban", talked it over with loup, who agreed a ban was fine, and so they were banned.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:48 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Two users have been banned and it's been fairly clear it was because of transphobia.
That said, I am seeing users breaking the rules/guidelines with the justification that they are in the right for doing so. I don't think that's exactly wrong, but do believe it's important to note and pump the brakes on members breaking rules/guidelines because they believe it's morally justified, end of story. That's line of thought/feeling is completely understandable, but don't want to encourage members feeling that they're morally justifiable to do this whenever they want.
We're probably gonna disagree about that, which is fine, we'll handle these situations as they come up.
brook horse: "It would be helpful to understand if The Master and Margarita Mix did something else to trigger a ban, or if that was how long it took mods to discuss the ban, given they were made aware of at least two transphobic comments on April 6th."
Previously they had been mention in discussions about someone to keep an eye on. When june_dodecahedron brought up their comments this afternoon, I went through their comments again, thought "Yes, it's time for ban", talked it over with loup, who agreed a ban was fine, and so they were banned.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 5:48 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
Thanks, appreciate the transparency.
posted by brook horse at 6:03 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
posted by brook horse at 6:03 PM on April 16 [2 favorites]
So profiles are public but we aren't to mention their contents? Am I the only one who finds that confusing?
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:03 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:03 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
I see you linked to the FAQ sorry. But it appears to apply to personal info. That wasn't personal info in that profile.
Can I publicly mention details from someone else's profile page?
Generally, no, unless you've gotten their explicit permission to do so. User profile pages on MetaFilter are not indexed by Google. This means if someone's profile says that they live in a certain city or gives their real name, that information is not exposed to search engines and should not be considered "public" on the rest of the site which search engines are allowed to catalogue
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:05 PM on April 16 [3 favorites]
Can I publicly mention details from someone else's profile page?
Generally, no, unless you've gotten their explicit permission to do so. User profile pages on MetaFilter are not indexed by Google. This means if someone's profile says that they live in a certain city or gives their real name, that information is not exposed to search engines and should not be considered "public" on the rest of the site which search engines are allowed to catalogue
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:05 PM on April 16 [3 favorites]
mefi is bad for trans people. fuck this site.
posted by secret about box at 6:22 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
posted by secret about box at 6:22 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Only way it gets better is if we fight. So I am.
posted by mephron at 6:30 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
posted by mephron at 6:30 PM on April 16 [12 favorites]
tiny frying pan: "So profiles are public but we aren't to mention their contents? Am I the only one who finds that confusing?"
It's not confusing to me so much as the FAQ includes some flexibility. Obviously, pulling someone's real name or address from a profile (which is not generally searchable) and publishing it is not OK. But there's not a hard ban on publishing any information on a profile and, in this case where there was relevant non-personal info, I thought it was fine and in accordance with the guideline, given the info itself was (it's gone now) in breach of guidelines in a much more serious way.
People have pointed out things in this thread that could have been done better (eg clearer, stronger wording in the mod note about a possible ban), but this doesn't seem like an example of moderators failing to do their job as has been seen in the past with similar incidents. This situation is, though, another clear example of the need to work towards a technical model that retains the evidence of misdeeds in a transparent way and doesn't look like letting people off the hook for their shitty behaviour. Deleted comments like this should be visible to better hold people to account, albeit hidden from casual view in some way. Tipping shitty comments into the memory hole doesn't do that and leads to people wondering if they were really all that bad. Leaving the deleted comments available would also have made the alleged 'fuck off' comment/s more understandable (and they were completely understandable - there are times when 'fuck off' is a perfectly appropriate response).
posted by dg at 6:31 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
It's not confusing to me so much as the FAQ includes some flexibility. Obviously, pulling someone's real name or address from a profile (which is not generally searchable) and publishing it is not OK. But there's not a hard ban on publishing any information on a profile and, in this case where there was relevant non-personal info, I thought it was fine and in accordance with the guideline, given the info itself was (it's gone now) in breach of guidelines in a much more serious way.
People have pointed out things in this thread that could have been done better (eg clearer, stronger wording in the mod note about a possible ban), but this doesn't seem like an example of moderators failing to do their job as has been seen in the past with similar incidents. This situation is, though, another clear example of the need to work towards a technical model that retains the evidence of misdeeds in a transparent way and doesn't look like letting people off the hook for their shitty behaviour. Deleted comments like this should be visible to better hold people to account, albeit hidden from casual view in some way. Tipping shitty comments into the memory hole doesn't do that and leads to people wondering if they were really all that bad. Leaving the deleted comments available would also have made the alleged 'fuck off' comment/s more understandable (and they were completely understandable - there are times when 'fuck off' is a perfectly appropriate response).
posted by dg at 6:31 PM on April 16 [5 favorites]
The "about" section of my profile has been unchanged since before my frontal lobe was fully cooked. It would be so embarrassing to have that private information about me publicly disclosed. Oh no. Stop. Don't.
posted by phunniemee at 6:32 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 6:32 PM on April 16 [7 favorites]
Mostly I don't think this was a total failure of the community.
Why is this the question?
We should be asking two things:
Question 1. Was the moderation harmful? Did moderator involvement make things worse?
Question 2. Was the moderation good? Did moderator involvement improve the situation?
Both might be true. They often are. Moderators usually take multiple actions in a contentious thread— for example, banning a user, deleting a comment by the offending user, deleting a "push back" comment, posting a mod note, and so on. Sometimes, one of these actions will improve the situation but another mod action makes it worse.
A good mod action will not necessarily negate a bad mod action. If they ban a user and then delete a comment pushing back on the banned user, there is still a problem.
Here's my main point:
Asking "Was this a total failure?" is a way to ask Question 2 without asking Question 1.
It's reductive. Its purpose is to reduce the discussion to one question instead of two. However, both are important. We cannot skip Question 1. When trans people leave the site, it's usually because they have been harmed. The mods should operate from the principle, "first, do no harm."
Anyway, that's the meta-meta conversation. My thoughts on the meta conversation:
I don't think telling a trans person to "chill" when they're responding to transphobia is appropriate, necessary, or helpful. Pointing out transphobia on people's profiles does not violate the spirit of the guideline to avoid exposing personal data to search engines. Saying "fuck off" to a transphobe shouldn't be against the guidelines. I'm glad the mods banned both CyberSlug Labs' and The Master and Margarita Mix. They should have written a clearer mod note or simply waited to take any mod actions (including deleting derails, push back comments, etc.) until they had decided to permanently ban CyberSlug Labs'.
posted by ftrtts at 1:19 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
Why is this the question?
We should be asking two things:
Question 1. Was the moderation harmful? Did moderator involvement make things worse?
Question 2. Was the moderation good? Did moderator involvement improve the situation?
Both might be true. They often are. Moderators usually take multiple actions in a contentious thread— for example, banning a user, deleting a comment by the offending user, deleting a "push back" comment, posting a mod note, and so on. Sometimes, one of these actions will improve the situation but another mod action makes it worse.
A good mod action will not necessarily negate a bad mod action. If they ban a user and then delete a comment pushing back on the banned user, there is still a problem.
Here's my main point:
Asking "Was this a total failure?" is a way to ask Question 2 without asking Question 1.
It's reductive. Its purpose is to reduce the discussion to one question instead of two. However, both are important. We cannot skip Question 1. When trans people leave the site, it's usually because they have been harmed. The mods should operate from the principle, "first, do no harm."
Anyway, that's the meta-meta conversation. My thoughts on the meta conversation:
I don't think telling a trans person to "chill" when they're responding to transphobia is appropriate, necessary, or helpful. Pointing out transphobia on people's profiles does not violate the spirit of the guideline to avoid exposing personal data to search engines. Saying "fuck off" to a transphobe shouldn't be against the guidelines. I'm glad the mods banned both CyberSlug Labs' and The Master and Margarita Mix. They should have written a clearer mod note or simply waited to take any mod actions (including deleting derails, push back comments, etc.) until they had decided to permanently ban CyberSlug Labs'.
posted by ftrtts at 1:19 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
* Responding “fuck off” to someone who’s acting so transphobic it’s worthy of a ban shouldn’t be against the guidelines.
posted by ftrtts at 2:10 AM on April 17 [25 favorites]
posted by ftrtts at 2:10 AM on April 17 [25 favorites]
This is probably the first one of these threads where I feel mostly okay about the outcome. Not that I'm some big stakeholder or anything, but, just, y'know, as a passenger in quite a few of these threads, most of which have ended with people leaving, this set of mod activities does not seem likely to inspire a mass exodus. I guess we'll see, as the thread evolves.
I am however struck by this line from Brandon: "Previously they had been mention in discussions about someone to keep an eye on. When june_dodecahedron brought up their comments this afternoon, I went through their comments again, thought 'Yes, it's time for ban', talked it over with loup, who agreed a ban was fine, and so they were banned."
If M&MM had been brought up in discussions, why was there no mod note for her answer in that askme? Had some communication gone out to say that the comment had been unacceptable? Could the second instance have been avoided if the askme answer had been dealt with? (wait, i think I just asked the same question as brook horse. forgive, i'm barely into my first cup of coffee this morning.)
It's a case where we see an action followed by a sort of retroactive rationale that doesn't quite fit, but where you can at least imagine a mod action that would've benefitted the site?
posted by mittens at 4:57 AM on April 17 [3 favorites]
I am however struck by this line from Brandon: "Previously they had been mention in discussions about someone to keep an eye on. When june_dodecahedron brought up their comments this afternoon, I went through their comments again, thought 'Yes, it's time for ban', talked it over with loup, who agreed a ban was fine, and so they were banned."
If M&MM had been brought up in discussions, why was there no mod note for her answer in that askme? Had some communication gone out to say that the comment had been unacceptable? Could the second instance have been avoided if the askme answer had been dealt with? (wait, i think I just asked the same question as brook horse. forgive, i'm barely into my first cup of coffee this morning.)
It's a case where we see an action followed by a sort of retroactive rationale that doesn't quite fit, but where you can at least imagine a mod action that would've benefitted the site?
posted by mittens at 4:57 AM on April 17 [3 favorites]
I think that's the core of my own concerns right now. These mod actions simply don't happen until the users goad the mods (repeatedly) into doing them. I shouldn't have to keep on top of this, and especially not while being told to chill out by the same mods.
When this meta went up, neither of the offenders had been banned. And in at least one case I don't believe the mods had any intention of issuing a ban until they were prodded yet again.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:06 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
When this meta went up, neither of the offenders had been banned. And in at least one case I don't believe the mods had any intention of issuing a ban until they were prodded yet again.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:06 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
I can understand why it's against the guidelines generally, but I think one of the reasons we have paid moderator staff instead of automated content filters is because we expect actual humans to know when someone is legitimately reasonably upset and not publicly chastise them in the moment for calling out bigotry and expressing their anger.
Honestly though, and not to derail, I feel like that post centered Turner, not Sullivan, and I think that's a mistake all on it's own, especially given that the Rolling Stone news story in which she said, "My entire life is political," wasn't actually linked in the post at all, just quoted at the end.
We need to stop centering bigots as the focus of narratives. That whole post could have been about Sullivan and the effects on her life.
posted by Chrysopoeia at 5:08 AM on April 17 [13 favorites]
Honestly though, and not to derail, I feel like that post centered Turner, not Sullivan, and I think that's a mistake all on it's own, especially given that the Rolling Stone news story in which she said, "My entire life is political," wasn't actually linked in the post at all, just quoted at the end.
We need to stop centering bigots as the focus of narratives. That whole post could have been about Sullivan and the effects on her life.
posted by Chrysopoeia at 5:08 AM on April 17 [13 favorites]
@Chrysopoeia, see here's the thing: nobody really gives a shit how the trans person (in this case Sullivan) feels or is affected. People are much more drawn to the cruel spectacle of the transphobia itself, and the fact of the transphobia being directed at a person is much less interesting.
So yeah, of course the thread was mostly about Turner. So of course I was told to shut up and keep my anger silent.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:17 AM on April 17 [9 favorites]
So yeah, of course the thread was mostly about Turner. So of course I was told to shut up and keep my anger silent.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:17 AM on April 17 [9 favorites]
The cynic in me thinks that cis people just find it easier to identify with someone like Turner rather than Sullivan. They can't imagine what it would be like to be a despised minority in a rapidly collapsing social order that is hell-bent on exterminating them.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:22 AM on April 17 [8 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 5:22 AM on April 17 [8 favorites]
Did we talk at one stage about a trans advisory board?
posted by Phanx at 5:53 AM on April 17 [2 favorites]
posted by Phanx at 5:53 AM on April 17 [2 favorites]
@Chrysopoeia: I had it on my links to put in there, but never did, so that's on me for not putting that link in. I had planned to, but it got missed in everything else I put in there (the followup bulletpoints were a late addition).
So blame me for that, if you want.
posted by mephron at 6:23 AM on April 17 [2 favorites]
So blame me for that, if you want.
posted by mephron at 6:23 AM on April 17 [2 favorites]
I think that's the core of my own concerns right now. These mod actions simply don't happen until the users goad the mods (repeatedly) into doing them. I shouldn't have to keep on top of this, and especially not while being told to chill out by the same mods.
When this meta went up, neither of the offenders had been banned. And in at least one case I don't believe the mods had any intention of issuing a ban until they were prodded yet again.
june_dodecahedron, this is a primary reason to question whether permabans issued swiftly by a single mod is a good idea.
For my part, I'm just sorry that a FPP from mephron got substantially derailed thanks to a transphobic comment. I'm thinking: was this preventable? How could the mods have handled this differently, for better outcomes? Was the community response poor? I'm probably focusing on the things I want to see, but I do see unequivocal allyship in many of the comments. I think people are open to doing work to improve things.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:40 AM on April 17 [3 favorites]
When this meta went up, neither of the offenders had been banned. And in at least one case I don't believe the mods had any intention of issuing a ban until they were prodded yet again.
june_dodecahedron, this is a primary reason to question whether permabans issued swiftly by a single mod is a good idea.
For my part, I'm just sorry that a FPP from mephron got substantially derailed thanks to a transphobic comment. I'm thinking: was this preventable? How could the mods have handled this differently, for better outcomes? Was the community response poor? I'm probably focusing on the things I want to see, but I do see unequivocal allyship in many of the comments. I think people are open to doing work to improve things.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:40 AM on April 17 [3 favorites]
@ginger.beef: I apologize for getting shirty at you earlier - from what you just said, I think you understand my back was up and, unfortunately, looking for the negative motives. You got caught in the backblast and did not deserve it.
While I find threats(h)itting objectionable, the next time I do a post about trans issues, I may keep more of an eye on it just so I can jump on these things if they come in early and just start flagging and reporting.
posted by mephron at 7:43 AM on April 17 [4 favorites]
While I find threats(h)itting objectionable, the next time I do a post about trans issues, I may keep more of an eye on it just so I can jump on these things if they come in early and just start flagging and reporting.
posted by mephron at 7:43 AM on April 17 [4 favorites]
For real though: can we find a way that MeFites can be aware of who is repeatedly getting deleted for the same kinds of offensive comments that is better than "a handful of people here keep a mental list"?
I don't feel like that is fair to put on them, but it's also wildly inefficient.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:46 AM on April 17 [21 favorites]
I don't feel like that is fair to put on them, but it's also wildly inefficient.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:46 AM on April 17 [21 favorites]
Although now that I read that, maybe it misidentifies the problem. We don't really need people who repeatedly make comments that are offensive in the same damn way marked, we need them banned.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:47 AM on April 17 [11 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:47 AM on April 17 [11 favorites]
@ginger.beef: I apologize for getting shirty at you earlier
I appreciate that mephron and I just want to repeat my thanks for the FPP, I don't think you have anything to apologize for, it did come across like a request for clarification and I don't think my comments are as clear as they should be at times
I'm a cis white male, to say I have blind spots and things to learn is an understatement. I'm approaching these topics differently, I can't pretend otherwise, so when this stuff happens in this space I need to appreciate that some MeFites feel this in their lives, they are at the front of the line when it comes to threats and bigotry
posted by ginger.beef at 8:25 AM on April 17 [7 favorites]
I appreciate that mephron and I just want to repeat my thanks for the FPP, I don't think you have anything to apologize for, it did come across like a request for clarification and I don't think my comments are as clear as they should be at times
I'm a cis white male, to say I have blind spots and things to learn is an understatement. I'm approaching these topics differently, I can't pretend otherwise, so when this stuff happens in this space I need to appreciate that some MeFites feel this in their lives, they are at the front of the line when it comes to threats and bigotry
posted by ginger.beef at 8:25 AM on April 17 [7 favorites]
oh man a comment i made five years ago feels like it still stands, more or less
also, hate to say it, the mod decision to tell people to chill out when posters make comments that, while not coarse, are incredibly hurtful and bad faith and shit up the thread besides feels representative of why metafilter feels, uh, less fun for me these days. it may be that my own preferred communication style is more aggressive than the metafilter cultural norm. but it also feels like the norms in place let specific kinds of very common internet jerk behavior go on longer than they need to, and create a lot of frustration as a result. i can kind of see why this is but it's still a bummer.
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 8:43 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
also, hate to say it, the mod decision to tell people to chill out when posters make comments that, while not coarse, are incredibly hurtful and bad faith and shit up the thread besides feels representative of why metafilter feels, uh, less fun for me these days. it may be that my own preferred communication style is more aggressive than the metafilter cultural norm. but it also feels like the norms in place let specific kinds of very common internet jerk behavior go on longer than they need to, and create a lot of frustration as a result. i can kind of see why this is but it's still a bummer.
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 8:43 AM on April 17 [19 favorites]
These comments from the 2017 tully_monster thread could have been written yesterday:
posted by ftrtts at 10:51 AM on April 17 [12 favorites]
I'm disappointed given the history here on mefi, and the seemingly infinite number of discussions, we have around this issue. Tully Monster should be banned or timed out at the least, and the bullshit in her profile should be removed as a condition of rejoining this community. It is offensive, and doesn't belong in this community, no ifs, no buts.and
[...]
Also, I kinda feel like pushing it back onto the user base to counter this stuff - whilst I can see how it might seem better to have impetus coming from mefites - pushes the burden of emotional labour onto mefites, especially trans members, and I don't think it's that fair.
So remind me, saying "fuck you" to another commenter [tully_monster] is still off limits, right?Anyway, I think I will go for a long walk.
posted by ftrtts at 10:51 AM on April 17 [12 favorites]
Hey let's be fair, if we have an extremely change averse user base, the same is obviously true of the mods
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:19 AM on April 17 [5 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:19 AM on April 17 [5 favorites]
I think the only reason those transphobic users were banned is because june_dodecahedron’s anger got the mods’ attention. We should be thanking them, not doubling down on asking them to chill.
posted by deadcrow at 12:08 PM on April 17 [20 favorites]
posted by deadcrow at 12:08 PM on April 17 [20 favorites]
deadcrow, the mods did thank june_dodecahedron right away in their first post discussing the issue in thread, before j_d doubled down with profanity.
So respectfully no, we shouldn't thank j_d for violating norms and swearing at people after the mods already stepped in, because it didn't add to the conversation and it didn't change the outcome of the mods actions.
More importantly, we should absolutely not ask the mods to moderate this site according to standard rules EXCEPT under certain circumstances. The mods decisions already get put under a microscope and adding more discretion to their role in these extremely sensitive situations is an enormously bad idea.
posted by tiamat at 1:39 PM on April 17 [4 favorites]
So respectfully no, we shouldn't thank j_d for violating norms and swearing at people after the mods already stepped in, because it didn't add to the conversation and it didn't change the outcome of the mods actions.
More importantly, we should absolutely not ask the mods to moderate this site according to standard rules EXCEPT under certain circumstances. The mods decisions already get put under a microscope and adding more discretion to their role in these extremely sensitive situations is an enormously bad idea.
posted by tiamat at 1:39 PM on April 17 [4 favorites]
Nor do I think we should ask the mods to ban people permanently faster then they do now. Temp bans should be as quick as possible to put out fires, once they're in place taking a moment to discuss a permanent ban is the best way forward because it allows oversight/consensus on serious decisions.
posted by tiamat at 1:45 PM on April 17 [4 favorites]
posted by tiamat at 1:45 PM on April 17 [4 favorites]
lol
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 1:46 PM on April 17 [9 favorites]
posted by nixon's meatloaf at 1:46 PM on April 17 [9 favorites]
That 2017 post about assuming genders was interesting. I recently came across a project i did in a Women's Studies class when I was in college, back in 1985. I wrote three versions of a short, otherwise identical story featuring two people with gender-neutral names: one in which the pronouns "she" and "he" were used, one in which they were both "he," and one in which they were both "she." The scenario was one person asking another on a date. (Maybe there were four scenarios? "She" asks "him" out, "he" asks her out? I didn't actually find the entire project, just some of the responses and the last two pages of the paper I wrote about it).
I asked participants to finish the story, without giving them any hints about what the study was about.
I found that quite a few students simply didn't notice when the pronouns were the same, and in the same-pronoun stories, these students usually assigned "he" to the character doing the asking out. A couple of people noticed the he/he couple and wrote homophobic ha-ha stories; I called these the "jokesters."
Anyway, my n=not very many, but I was looking to see how ingrained gender assumptions were, and among a small group of undergrads at University of Michigan in 1985, the answer was, "pretty darn ingrained." Many people seemed to have just seen what they expected to see.
posted by Well I never at 1:54 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
I asked participants to finish the story, without giving them any hints about what the study was about.
I found that quite a few students simply didn't notice when the pronouns were the same, and in the same-pronoun stories, these students usually assigned "he" to the character doing the asking out. A couple of people noticed the he/he couple and wrote homophobic ha-ha stories; I called these the "jokesters."
Anyway, my n=not very many, but I was looking to see how ingrained gender assumptions were, and among a small group of undergrads at University of Michigan in 1985, the answer was, "pretty darn ingrained." Many people seemed to have just seen what they expected to see.
posted by Well I never at 1:54 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
Cishet person here who would MUCH rather be in a space where approbation is directed at transphobia, and not at trans people getting righteously angry about being dehumanized. Fuck tone policing.
posted by solotoro at 1:58 PM on April 17 [18 favorites]
posted by solotoro at 1:58 PM on April 17 [18 favorites]
Aw I love when people say profanity, it sounds so quaint.
posted by phunniemee at 2:00 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 2:00 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
Mildly related, I was going to throw a question up on Ask the other day then got distracted. Is there a gendy nooch term for grandpa/grandma? And before you say "um what's wrong with grandparent?" it's because this is like the third time this week I've wanted to make a "oh that's nice grandma, let's go get your medicine" joke without having to gender the insult.
posted by phunniemee at 2:02 PM on April 17 [2 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 2:02 PM on April 17 [2 favorites]
(p.s. good job everyone, another trans mefite buttoned)
posted by phunniemee at 2:08 PM on April 17 [8 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 2:08 PM on April 17 [8 favorites]
Oh shit, who buttoned?
Edit: seems to be nixons meatloaf?
God damn it metafilter. Try being less shit
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:52 PM on April 17 [8 favorites]
Edit: seems to be nixons meatloaf?
God damn it metafilter. Try being less shit
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:52 PM on April 17 [8 favorites]
solotoro: "Cishet person here who would MUCH rather be in a space where approbation is directed at transphobia, and not at trans people getting righteously angry about being dehumanized. Fuck tone policing.
posted by solotoro at 6:58 on April 18 [quote] [6 favorites +] [⚑]"
Hear, hear. Yes, it's against the guidelines to tell someone to fuck off, but even police officers understand that people hitting back against an attack get some leeway in how they do that. Scolding someone for breaking pretty minor guidelines in that context just takes the heat off the actual culprit in the situation.
posted by dg at 3:59 PM on April 17 [7 favorites]
posted by solotoro at 6:58 on April 18 [quote] [6 favorites +] [⚑]"
Hear, hear. Yes, it's against the guidelines to tell someone to fuck off, but even police officers understand that people hitting back against an attack get some leeway in how they do that. Scolding someone for breaking pretty minor guidelines in that context just takes the heat off the actual culprit in the situation.
posted by dg at 3:59 PM on April 17 [7 favorites]
Hi, it's a mod, and we're listening to what people are saying how this situation was handled. It's the weekend, though, with less mods around, so we'll just keep listening for the moment.
That said, my only idea for making things a better for trans issues on the site is to craft a short comment that mods could post in trans related threads that makes it clear that the site doesn't tolerate people trans hate or prejudice.
Something like (just off the top of my head):
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:17 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
That said, my only idea for making things a better for trans issues on the site is to craft a short comment that mods could post in trans related threads that makes it clear that the site doesn't tolerate people trans hate or prejudice.
Something like (just off the top of my head):
Hey, this is a note from the site moderators that MetaFilter is a trans friendly site and people should not be posting anything remotely hateful about the trans community at on the site and especially in these threads. Doing so can result in a temporary ban as moderators discuss whether to make the ban permanent. Seriously, treat trans people with kindness and resist any urge to label them as a type of other.Basically something that could be easily posted near the beginning of every trans thread, that clearly signals that the isn't tolerating trans hate in any way, shape, or form and bans are the table if people do get ugly. Obviously all of the above be better written and edits are welcome. Just a suggestion and i'll be around tomorrow if people want to discuss this idea or any other.
If you're not trans and not sure what constitutes hateful talk, please just avoid commenting and listen to what's being said. If you have questions, feel free to email us.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 7:17 PM on April 17 [3 favorites]
why would anyone believe that would be reliably backed up?
That reads as the shallowest possible response, and for it to be your "only thought" means maybe you should have thought further or at the very least stopped after "keep listening for the moment".
I believe mods have indeed already tried - or had users try - rerailing, 101-style comments at the start of threads, and it doesn't seem to have made a major difference.
posted by sagc at 7:40 PM on April 17 [11 favorites]
That reads as the shallowest possible response, and for it to be your "only thought" means maybe you should have thought further or at the very least stopped after "keep listening for the moment".
I believe mods have indeed already tried - or had users try - rerailing, 101-style comments at the start of threads, and it doesn't seem to have made a major difference.
posted by sagc at 7:40 PM on April 17 [11 favorites]
a website that does not allow people to expose transphobic users and tell them to fuck off is a safe harbor for transphobia.
"we can't violate norms" is part of the problem -- the bad people know they can exploit this weakness
posted by secret about box at 7:44 PM on April 17 [27 favorites]
"we can't violate norms" is part of the problem -- the bad people know they can exploit this weakness
posted by secret about box at 7:44 PM on April 17 [27 favorites]
> MetaFilter is a trans friendly site
this is something a cis person thinks but is not actually true
posted by secret about box at 7:45 PM on April 17 [22 favorites]
this is something a cis person thinks but is not actually true
posted by secret about box at 7:45 PM on April 17 [22 favorites]
I think the community writ large disagrees, it's totally possible to ban people without swearing at them, there's no contradiction there and it doesn't make the site safe for bad actors at all. We could have a community where we don't shout or swear at each other AND ban people who say offensive things about trans people, that would be my choice!
"Metafilter is a trans friendly site" was pretty clearly a statement of intent not truth. Please don't lower the quality of the conversation by being disingenuous about what the mods/staff say/mean. That would be great.
posted by tiamat at 8:01 PM on April 17 [5 favorites]
"Metafilter is a trans friendly site" was pretty clearly a statement of intent not truth. Please don't lower the quality of the conversation by being disingenuous about what the mods/staff say/mean. That would be great.
posted by tiamat at 8:01 PM on April 17 [5 favorites]
"Please don't lower the quality of the conversation by being disingenuous about what the mods/staff say/mean."
Please don't act like this one thread isn't connected to decades of half-hearted support, puzzling mod decisions, and trans misogyny.
Maybe go wave your little flag elsewhere, we're trying to have a serious discussion here.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 9:30 PM on April 17 [21 favorites]
Please don't act like this one thread isn't connected to decades of half-hearted support, puzzling mod decisions, and trans misogyny.
Maybe go wave your little flag elsewhere, we're trying to have a serious discussion here.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 9:30 PM on April 17 [21 favorites]
If you're a cis person, it would be great if you listened rather than making sweeping conclusions about what the "community" wants. Because it's clear there is the community who hardly thinks at all about their tone deafness around dealing with transphobia on this site. Metafilter is not a trans friendly site so to say so is disingenuous. "Transphobia will not be tolerated here." Should be the base level statement. Period.
posted by mxjudyliza at 9:33 PM on April 17 [22 favorites]
posted by mxjudyliza at 9:33 PM on April 17 [22 favorites]
(...and noting that it's a common tactic of the abusive and those operating in less than good faith to say, "why are you so hung up on the past?" when one brings up a pattern of bad behavior.)
Seconding the above comment. Please let trans people speak about their experiences in here.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 9:37 PM on April 17 [14 favorites]
Seconding the above comment. Please let trans people speak about their experiences in here.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 9:37 PM on April 17 [14 favorites]
So respectfully no, we shouldn't thank j_d for violating norms and swearing at people after the mods already stepped in, because it didn't add to the conversation and it didn't change the outcome of the mods actions.
Anger, when being poorly treated is fair and swearing is part of that. That you and in general the mods seem to think that saying a curse word is worse than transphobia is the problem.
posted by Candleman at 11:25 PM on April 17 [23 favorites]
Anger, when being poorly treated is fair and swearing is part of that. That you and in general the mods seem to think that saying a curse word is worse than transphobia is the problem.
posted by Candleman at 11:25 PM on April 17 [23 favorites]
solotoro: "Cishet person here who would MUCH rather be in a space where approbation is directed at transphobia, and not at trans people getting righteously angry about being dehumanized. Fuck tone policing."
I think you mean "disapprobation", but yes, cosigned.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:42 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
I think you mean "disapprobation", but yes, cosigned.
posted by adrienneleigh at 12:42 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
I think it would be reasonable to ask people to refrain from heated responses to offensive comments, if and only if there was an effective, reliable and trusted mechanism by which offensive material was dealt with by moderators and repeat offenders prevented from continuing.
In that case it would be fair to ask people, in general, to refrain from responding intemperately in the comments, and to use official channels to deal with a problem if they're understandably too angry to be polite about it in public.
That does not mean that it would be appropriate to call people out publicly for such intemperate comments without understanding or acknowledging the context.
It does not mean that it's appropriate to treat such intemperate responses as equivalent to the offensive material that inspired them.
I also think it's a mistake to declare that any space on the internet is "trans friendly" - even within spaces entirely consisting of trans people it's possible to find intra-community disagreements and gatekeeping that not everyone will find friendly. It's not helpful to mislead people about the extent of support that they can expect.
But it is very sensible to foreground more factual information like "here is our policy on transphobia; here is where we explain the consequences of breaking the rules; please help us by reporting inappropriate content, which you can do by ...". Enabling people to put something like that as a tone setter at the top of posts seems like a great idea.
posted by quacks like a duck at 1:14 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
In that case it would be fair to ask people, in general, to refrain from responding intemperately in the comments, and to use official channels to deal with a problem if they're understandably too angry to be polite about it in public.
That does not mean that it would be appropriate to call people out publicly for such intemperate comments without understanding or acknowledging the context.
It does not mean that it's appropriate to treat such intemperate responses as equivalent to the offensive material that inspired them.
I also think it's a mistake to declare that any space on the internet is "trans friendly" - even within spaces entirely consisting of trans people it's possible to find intra-community disagreements and gatekeeping that not everyone will find friendly. It's not helpful to mislead people about the extent of support that they can expect.
But it is very sensible to foreground more factual information like "here is our policy on transphobia; here is where we explain the consequences of breaking the rules; please help us by reporting inappropriate content, which you can do by ...". Enabling people to put something like that as a tone setter at the top of posts seems like a great idea.
posted by quacks like a duck at 1:14 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
Another transphobe has just provided a nice opportunity for us to see this all in action.
Mods, can I assume that the user described here has been given a permanent ban for their shitty transphobic comment?
posted by fight or flight at 2:12 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
Mods, can I assume that the user described here has been given a permanent ban for their shitty transphobic comment?
posted by fight or flight at 2:12 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
I'd like to know the same with regard to the user who subsequently decided to add a (quickly deleted) comment about "science".
posted by Strutter Cane - United Planets Stilt Patrol at 2:26 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by Strutter Cane - United Planets Stilt Patrol at 2:26 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Yes, mods, will the transphobes from this thread be banned?
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:37 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:37 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
A random Thursday on MetaFilter: “it’s the weekend, we can’t deal with any of this”
Nice that transphobes get a four day weekend. Monday is a holiday where I am, so I guess we’ll be back on Tuesday?
posted by donnagirl at 3:25 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
Nice that transphobes get a four day weekend. Monday is a holiday where I am, so I guess we’ll be back on Tuesday?
posted by donnagirl at 3:25 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
Mod note: june_dodecahedron: "Yes, mods, will the transphobes from this thread be banned?"
Yes, bluemat and Czjewels have been permanently banned for being transphobic and a note has been left in that thread stating so.
Frimble originally noticed the comments and reached out to the mod on duty, goodnewsfortheinsane, who removed the comments and put a note in the mod Slack requesting another opinion on whether the two accounts should be banned. I happened to be up and noticed what was going on, told gnfti that a perm ban made sense. Gnfti went ahead and did the actual banning, made a goof and temporarily banned fight or flight, Rhaomi pointed that out and the mistake was quickly corrected.
Apologies about that fight or flick, it was a mistake on our part and quickly made right.
Otherwise, yes we are serious about being more aggressive about transphobia on the site. Loup explicitly left a comment on the mod slack about it yesterday: "We should be more aggressive towards these types of comments", in reference to transphobic comments made by The Master and Margarita Mix and CyberSlug Labs, who were permanently banned yesterday.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:32 AM on April 18 [10 favorites]
Yes, bluemat and Czjewels have been permanently banned for being transphobic and a note has been left in that thread stating so.
Frimble originally noticed the comments and reached out to the mod on duty, goodnewsfortheinsane, who removed the comments and put a note in the mod Slack requesting another opinion on whether the two accounts should be banned. I happened to be up and noticed what was going on, told gnfti that a perm ban made sense. Gnfti went ahead and did the actual banning, made a goof and temporarily banned fight or flight, Rhaomi pointed that out and the mistake was quickly corrected.
Apologies about that fight or flick, it was a mistake on our part and quickly made right.
Otherwise, yes we are serious about being more aggressive about transphobia on the site. Loup explicitly left a comment on the mod slack about it yesterday: "We should be more aggressive towards these types of comments", in reference to transphobic comments made by The Master and Margarita Mix and CyberSlug Labs, who were permanently banned yesterday.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:32 AM on April 18 [10 favorites]
Thanks BB and other mods for the swift action, sorry it was necessary! And no worries about the mistake, it happens.
posted by fight or flight at 3:37 AM on April 18 [6 favorites]
posted by fight or flight at 3:37 AM on April 18 [6 favorites]
Cheers! I was too eager.
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane (staff) at 3:40 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
posted by goodnewsfortheinsane (staff) at 3:40 AM on April 18 [5 favorites]
A random Thursday on MetaFilter: “it’s the weekend, we can’t deal with any of this”
Yep, I goofed on the days, totally thought it was Friday here on the American east coast when making that comment, my apologies.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:11 AM on April 18
Yep, I goofed on the days, totally thought it was Friday here on the American east coast when making that comment, my apologies.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:11 AM on April 18
I'm pretty sad about czjewel being banned. Since I didn't see his comment, I can't really judge what he said, but I will be extra-sad if it turns out to be one of those old-gay-guy things people say when their understanding of trans issues got baked in back in the 70s, because I do not think banning is the right approach there. I understand the site disagrees with me on that, and I understand the idea that "cis people ought to call-in and educate other cis people" is for some reason controversial on this site. I will no longer argue that point; ego te absolvo.
I will be even sadder if he got banned for saying something along the lines of cyberslug's comment that kicked off this thread. (But for the opposite reason, because then he really would have deserved it, and I would have badly misread his personality.)
I don't want to become one of those people who talks about moderation a lot. I think in general I have tried to be really objective about moderation on the site, and sympathetic to what seems like a difficult job under a ton of scrutiny. But having said that, I simply do not trust this current approach. I don't trust that the mods understand the dog-whistles; I don't trust that they'll continue paying attention after the current furor dies down. I think we'll end up banning people who are not actually meaning to say transphobic things, and I think egregious statements will be missed until 20 people flag it and 30 people button.
posted by mittens at 4:37 AM on April 18 [3 favorites]
I will be even sadder if he got banned for saying something along the lines of cyberslug's comment that kicked off this thread. (But for the opposite reason, because then he really would have deserved it, and I would have badly misread his personality.)
I don't want to become one of those people who talks about moderation a lot. I think in general I have tried to be really objective about moderation on the site, and sympathetic to what seems like a difficult job under a ton of scrutiny. But having said that, I simply do not trust this current approach. I don't trust that the mods understand the dog-whistles; I don't trust that they'll continue paying attention after the current furor dies down. I think we'll end up banning people who are not actually meaning to say transphobic things, and I think egregious statements will be missed until 20 people flag it and 30 people button.
posted by mittens at 4:37 AM on April 18 [3 favorites]
Nah, czjewel sucked. I've had to flag his comments a few times for being straightforwardly transphobic.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 4:43 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 4:43 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
We could have a community where we don't shout or swear at each other AND ban people who say offensive things about trans people, that would be my choice!
Um why do you care so much that a transphobe was told to fuck off
What was the harm
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:43 AM on April 18 [10 favorites]
CZJewel stands out to me as someone who has repeatedly said transphobic things, I'm fine with it. Finally, some action. There are others.
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:49 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 4:49 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
You also might very well feel salty after years of invalidation, verbal abuse, difficulty with employment, difficulty with medical care, sexual assault, physical assault, people pointing and laughing, estranged friends, estranged family, people discussing you like you're not there, being targeted by nation-states, not being taken seriously about your own experiences and the endless, grinding, tone policing that follows.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:50 AM on April 18 [19 favorites]
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:50 AM on April 18 [19 favorites]
But the real problem is our tone, huh?
Bless your heart.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:51 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
Bless your heart.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:51 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
I also recall czjewel doing some both sidesing in the Charlet Chung thread, for which he was deleted at the time.
I've never really bought the old guy opinion thing. People brush it off like like "oh, they're from a different time!" but guys, we are all alive right now. If you held progressive values, your values would be progressing.
(At least he never used pRoFaNiTiEs.)
posted by phunniemee at 4:52 AM on April 18 [18 favorites]
I've never really bought the old guy opinion thing. People brush it off like like "oh, they're from a different time!" but guys, we are all alive right now. If you held progressive values, your values would be progressing.
(At least he never used pRoFaNiTiEs.)
posted by phunniemee at 4:52 AM on April 18 [18 favorites]
I begun transition 30 years ago. Of my local cohort, I'm the only one still alive.
I tried the sweetness and light approach for a couple of decades. It does not work. It gets one walked over, talked over, and only serves to center the feelings of bigots and the ignorant.
And I'm fucking done with it.
If I happen to blast your hair back with invective, assume I'm doing it to shock you just long enough to listen
In my experience, soft pushback is ignored.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:56 AM on April 18 [24 favorites]
I tried the sweetness and light approach for a couple of decades. It does not work. It gets one walked over, talked over, and only serves to center the feelings of bigots and the ignorant.
And I'm fucking done with it.
If I happen to blast your hair back with invective, assume I'm doing it to shock you just long enough to listen
In my experience, soft pushback is ignored.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 4:56 AM on April 18 [24 favorites]
taz: "Reasons for removal: victim blaming (she shouldn't have repeated "fuck" so much"
Loving this mod note from the Charlet Chung thread, though!!
posted by phunniemee at 4:58 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Loving this mod note from the Charlet Chung thread, though!!
posted by phunniemee at 4:58 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
aw man, fight or flight, I was working on a post on that too, but making a hugantic timeline of what led to it. I just got tired and figured I could wait until today.
Oh well. I'm thinking about a regular Thursday LGBTQAI+ news post, and hey, there's nothing wrong with linking to other people's posts on subjects, so that's good.
posted by mephron at 5:08 AM on April 18 [4 favorites]
Oh well. I'm thinking about a regular Thursday LGBTQAI+ news post, and hey, there's nothing wrong with linking to other people's posts on subjects, so that's good.
posted by mephron at 5:08 AM on April 18 [4 favorites]
Not to say that FoF's post is not awesome and has more than I had dug up to put into my post. You should read it. Now.
Here, I'll give you a direct link.
Why are you still reading this?
posted by mephron at 5:47 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Here, I'll give you a direct link.
Why are you still reading this?
posted by mephron at 5:47 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Hey speaking of disingenuous debate, no one had said anything that even remotely sounds like swearing is worse then transphobia. Yet I see a whole bunch of folks implying that's the case. Yes you can easily win that argument and your comments are pithy and biting, but no, you're not actually disagreeing with anything anyone has said here today.
To be super clear: I think people posting transphobic things should be banned. I also think people telling each other to f off should have their comments deleted, especially if they're doing that AFTER the mods have already showed up.
posted by tiamat at 6:14 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
To be super clear: I think people posting transphobic things should be banned. I also think people telling each other to f off should have their comments deleted, especially if they're doing that AFTER the mods have already showed up.
posted by tiamat at 6:14 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Yes, we understand that you are very upset that someone said a bad word.
posted by mittens at 6:18 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
posted by mittens at 6:18 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
I'm actually not. If anything these days mostly upset that the mods and staff get shit on no matter what they do.
I'm a more upset that the swearing thing is even a debate, because it's a symptom of why the left is losing so badly politically everywhere these days. I can't just support trans rights, I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself. (And yes I'm aware that even using the word tone ends the debate in many circles these days, but it shouldn't and refusing to say that is resulting in the left losing elections and debates and making the real world much less safe for trans people and minorities of all kinds).
posted by tiamat at 6:33 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
I'm a more upset that the swearing thing is even a debate, because it's a symptom of why the left is losing so badly politically everywhere these days. I can't just support trans rights, I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself. (And yes I'm aware that even using the word tone ends the debate in many circles these days, but it shouldn't and refusing to say that is resulting in the left losing elections and debates and making the real world much less safe for trans people and minorities of all kinds).
posted by tiamat at 6:33 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
tiamat: "I can't just support trans rights, I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself."
As a trans person: I coudn't give a flying fuck (sorry!) if you agree with my fucking (sorry!) tone and message. Just fucking (sorry!) support trans rights.
posted by fight or flight at 6:37 AM on April 18 [24 favorites]
As a trans person: I coudn't give a flying fuck (sorry!) if you agree with my fucking (sorry!) tone and message. Just fucking (sorry!) support trans rights.
posted by fight or flight at 6:37 AM on April 18 [24 favorites]
lol
"this is why you're losing the debate" sure buddy, that's it, trans people are too visibly angry.
Mods are getting "shit on" for reprimanding people who are helping the community by pointing out transphobia, and for being abysmal at reading for context and communicating their actions.
Fuck right off with "making the world less safe" even so many real things are happening. And yet it's the swearing and anger that gets you complaining here?
posted by sagc at 6:37 AM on April 18 [14 favorites]
"this is why you're losing the debate" sure buddy, that's it, trans people are too visibly angry.
Mods are getting "shit on" for reprimanding people who are helping the community by pointing out transphobia, and for being abysmal at reading for context and communicating their actions.
Fuck right off with "making the world less safe" even so many real things are happening. And yet it's the swearing and anger that gets you complaining here?
posted by sagc at 6:37 AM on April 18 [14 favorites]
I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself.
Oh my god you do not. You really do not have to agree with everything everyone thinks, says and does. Sex and gender are big complicated topics and it's okay for people to disagree on stuff, you just have to go into it with the belief that people are people and entitled to the same rights and freedoms as you. And that includes the right of self-interpretation!
But you do have to kind of understand that when someone comes in and goes, "You folks are grooming kids because you're a bunch of child molesters," fists are going to fly. You think if someone said that to you, to your face, you'd be all calm and like, "I'll just wait until an authority comes in and takes care of things"?
You're asking for people to be saints about a seriously nasty accusation. The accusation and the "fuck you" are not remotely the same, ethically or conversationally.
posted by mittens at 6:41 AM on April 18 [27 favorites]
Oh my god you do not. You really do not have to agree with everything everyone thinks, says and does. Sex and gender are big complicated topics and it's okay for people to disagree on stuff, you just have to go into it with the belief that people are people and entitled to the same rights and freedoms as you. And that includes the right of self-interpretation!
But you do have to kind of understand that when someone comes in and goes, "You folks are grooming kids because you're a bunch of child molesters," fists are going to fly. You think if someone said that to you, to your face, you'd be all calm and like, "I'll just wait until an authority comes in and takes care of things"?
You're asking for people to be saints about a seriously nasty accusation. The accusation and the "fuck you" are not remotely the same, ethically or conversationally.
posted by mittens at 6:41 AM on April 18 [27 favorites]
So the Historical Moderation Perspective on "fuck off" (/fuck you/go to hell/similar, usually profane, statements directed at another user): They're not a problem because of the language, this site has historically not given a flying fuck about profanity. They're a problem because they're conversation-enders - there is nowhere to go from a statement like that but escalation, and that kills the discussion dead in its tracks. (And usually leads to worse and worse shouted insults, which is tedious and unproductive.) So that's always been on the prohibited list, because it's counter to the purpose of having discussions.
The thing is, that kind of statement? People want to make it because they want that conversation to end. (That conversational thread, anyway.) They're essentially attempts at a moderation action! People use them either when it doesn't occur to them/they don't know how to reach out to the staff, or they don't trust the staff to take appropriate or timely action. It's still an escalatory and usually ineffective moderation action to tell someone to fuck off, but it's the one people sometimes reach for.
I still don't think it's an appropriate tactic on Metafilter, but I get why people use it and why they're so defensive of its use. And moderation here is very far from the 24/7 short-response-time full-coverage moderation that was the norm when a lot of site policy was written, when we really could jump in and deal with things before it got to that point. (I am, and have been for a while, leaning towards decentralizing moderation, but that's the sort of decision that's going to need to be made by the board and hopefully-eventual ED.)
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 6:46 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
The thing is, that kind of statement? People want to make it because they want that conversation to end. (That conversational thread, anyway.) They're essentially attempts at a moderation action! People use them either when it doesn't occur to them/they don't know how to reach out to the staff, or they don't trust the staff to take appropriate or timely action. It's still an escalatory and usually ineffective moderation action to tell someone to fuck off, but it's the one people sometimes reach for.
I still don't think it's an appropriate tactic on Metafilter, but I get why people use it and why they're so defensive of its use. And moderation here is very far from the 24/7 short-response-time full-coverage moderation that was the norm when a lot of site policy was written, when we really could jump in and deal with things before it got to that point. (I am, and have been for a while, leaning towards decentralizing moderation, but that's the sort of decision that's going to need to be made by the board and hopefully-eventual ED.)
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 6:46 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
This may sound weird, but I almost want to keep this particular MeTa open indefinitely. I want to do this because the next time a repeat offender says something transphobic, I don't want it going onto a mental list that someone keeps, I want it brought out right here so that we can say "THIS MOTHERFUCKER RIGHT HERE. This one one too" and we can yeet that turd right out into the fucking Oort Cloud.
Because there are more. Sure as shit there are more.
If this is a thread where they finally get their ban, let it never end. There is still plenty more work to do.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:54 AM on April 18 [17 favorites]
Because there are more. Sure as shit there are more.
If this is a thread where they finally get their ban, let it never end. There is still plenty more work to do.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 6:54 AM on April 18 [17 favorites]
I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself.
I'd say that if you're feeling frustrated about a conversation about a marginalized identity that you don't share, that is time to look at another post. I say this looking back at times in my own life when I was unfairly frustrated by certain such conversations.
This often turned out to be fatigue or a sense of threat or ego injury and it was good to take a break. Other times I just needed to recognize that marginalized people can also take stupid or politically reckless positions in conversation, and it does not make things better for anyone if I jump in to 'correct' matters.
No one has to agree per se, IMO. But coming into conversations about trans matters in order to say "well I think trans people are wrong" is really not what those threads are for.
posted by Frowner at 6:54 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
I'd say that if you're feeling frustrated about a conversation about a marginalized identity that you don't share, that is time to look at another post. I say this looking back at times in my own life when I was unfairly frustrated by certain such conversations.
This often turned out to be fatigue or a sense of threat or ego injury and it was good to take a break. Other times I just needed to recognize that marginalized people can also take stupid or politically reckless positions in conversation, and it does not make things better for anyone if I jump in to 'correct' matters.
No one has to agree per se, IMO. But coming into conversations about trans matters in order to say "well I think trans people are wrong" is really not what those threads are for.
posted by Frowner at 6:54 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
Can we just go ahead and give june_dodecahedron mod power, they're doing more for this problem than the actual mods.
I still don't think it's an appropriate tactic on Metafilter, but I get why people use it and why they're so defensive of its use.
In ideal world, I'd be happy seeing the fuck-off/etc. posts being deleted just to clean up the discussion after a proper mod action, without any penalty to the fuck-off poster. People gonna people. In the world we actually have right now, I'd rather see a thousand profane comments stand in the thread than a single non-banned transphobe.
posted by mrgoat at 6:55 AM on April 18 [12 favorites]
I still don't think it's an appropriate tactic on Metafilter, but I get why people use it and why they're so defensive of its use.
In ideal world, I'd be happy seeing the fuck-off/etc. posts being deleted just to clean up the discussion after a proper mod action, without any penalty to the fuck-off poster. People gonna people. In the world we actually have right now, I'd rather see a thousand profane comments stand in the thread than a single non-banned transphobe.
posted by mrgoat at 6:55 AM on April 18 [12 favorites]
Mittens: "The accusation and the "fuck you" are not remotely the same, ethically or conversationally."
(Sorry haven't figured out the new quote thing).
I totally agree. Literally nothing anyone said was intended to imply anything even near that point. The actions the mods took were to ban the transphobe and delete a comment with some swearing. These are not the same. No one is saying swearing is as bad as transphobia.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:14 AM on April 18
(Sorry haven't figured out the new quote thing).
I totally agree. Literally nothing anyone said was intended to imply anything even near that point. The actions the mods took were to ban the transphobe and delete a comment with some swearing. These are not the same. No one is saying swearing is as bad as transphobia.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:14 AM on April 18
dude, you are giving me a migraine
posted by mittens at 7:36 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by mittens at 7:36 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
czjewel was also randomly racist - and said "I know" when called out on it.
posted by soelo at 7:39 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by soelo at 7:39 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
On the issue of terf talking points. Some of them are, at least in part, factually true. That doesn't mean their arguments are valid, they are totally not. But the reaction in the other thread when I touched upon them kind of makes my point about the left eating itself. I created a sock puppet to make some points about how to better fight terfs, but because I used factual examples that overlap with terf talking points doesn't make me a terf. There's no transitive property of argument where two people who agree on underlying fact have to agree on conclusions.
I honestly did not anticipate that a reference to a Toronto spa that I live near would garner such a heated reponse. It's literally an issue I've only heard of from actual humans, if there's abroader existing conversation about that I'm not aware of it. From the level of heat on that particular point I feel like I maybe choose a really bad example that hit on something I'm not aware of, which maybe made me sound disingenuous? that wasn't my intent.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:54 AM on April 18
I honestly did not anticipate that a reference to a Toronto spa that I live near would garner such a heated reponse. It's literally an issue I've only heard of from actual humans, if there's abroader existing conversation about that I'm not aware of it. From the level of heat on that particular point I feel like I maybe choose a really bad example that hit on something I'm not aware of, which maybe made me sound disingenuous? that wasn't my intent.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:54 AM on April 18
Sorry for context I'm now taking about the conversion that started here https://www.metafilter.com/208456/news-from-rainy-fascist-terf-island#8713659
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:57 AM on April 18
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 7:57 AM on April 18
czjewel was also randomly racist - and said "I know" when called out on it.
I think he got a pass most of the time because he was an elderly gay man. But that doesn't mean you get to type out your awful crystallized thoughts. Shepherd has an elderly gay uncle we cut out of our lives simply because he wouldn't stop being racist about Middle Eastern people living around him and he constantly used the "I can't be racist because I'm gay" angle. A lot of his family tried to talk to him about this, being kind or firm about it, but he kept on. Now he's isolated himself in his late 70s from the family simply because he won't stop.
When I would read czjewel's comments on the Blue, that uncle is immediately who I thought of.
posted by Kitteh at 7:59 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
I think he got a pass most of the time because he was an elderly gay man. But that doesn't mean you get to type out your awful crystallized thoughts. Shepherd has an elderly gay uncle we cut out of our lives simply because he wouldn't stop being racist about Middle Eastern people living around him and he constantly used the "I can't be racist because I'm gay" angle. A lot of his family tried to talk to him about this, being kind or firm about it, but he kept on. Now he's isolated himself in his late 70s from the family simply because he won't stop.
When I would read czjewel's comments on the Blue, that uncle is immediately who I thought of.
posted by Kitteh at 7:59 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
both fight or flight and frowner made good points about whether this particular conversation belongs in these threads, and so i'm going to bow out of the "but you're wrong" part of the conversation. i'm pretty mad, but this isn't the mittens show and my need to grar isn't the important thing at this moment. (eta: oops, sorry, that was a response to my conversation with honestally-sock, but kitteh's comment appeared right as i posted.)
posted by mittens at 8:00 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by mittens at 8:00 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
If you're going to come wage a niche and unpopular battle as a sock puppet my best advice to you would to spell check some common phrases so that people won't be tempted to search Metafilter for other times that unique misspelling has been used.
(It's kernel of truth. Like a corn kernel. See what happens when you ban creamed corn discourse on this site?)
posted by phunniemee at 8:03 AM on April 18 [14 favorites]
(It's kernel of truth. Like a corn kernel. See what happens when you ban creamed corn discourse on this site?)
posted by phunniemee at 8:03 AM on April 18 [14 favorites]
I'd like to think people wouldn't feel a need to create sock accounts, but I guess to each their own
I'm not in the mood, my heart's not in it, but I'm compelled by contract to say
CREAMED CORN
posted by ginger.beef at 8:09 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
I'm not in the mood, my heart's not in it, but I'm compelled by contract to say
CREAMED CORN
posted by ginger.beef at 8:09 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
I'm a more upset that the swearing thing is even a debate, because it's a symptom of why the left is losing so badly politically everywhere these days. I can't just support trans rights, I have to 100% agree with the tone and message and method of everyone whose intersectionality is more complex then myself.
The flip side of this is that you're saying that in order to be comfortable in a conversation you need it to conform to your idea of politeness. And like, we're on a site where there's an on going discussion if "ma'am" is polite or not.
So I don't know man, if you want to live in a world where you can have a conversation on if swearing is a good tactic or not, maybe work to make it so that people aren't hurting and angry all time from constantly being under physical, verbal and societal attacks. Otherwise, people who are hurting and angry are going to express their hurt and anger.
posted by Gygesringtone at 8:09 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
The flip side of this is that you're saying that in order to be comfortable in a conversation you need it to conform to your idea of politeness. And like, we're on a site where there's an on going discussion if "ma'am" is polite or not.
So I don't know man, if you want to live in a world where you can have a conversation on if swearing is a good tactic or not, maybe work to make it so that people aren't hurting and angry all time from constantly being under physical, verbal and societal attacks. Otherwise, people who are hurting and angry are going to express their hurt and anger.
posted by Gygesringtone at 8:09 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
HonestAlly-sock: "On the issue of terf talking points. Some of them are, at least in part, factually true."
At some point, if you agree that trans people are people, you should stop trying to make points and argue stuff.
It literally all comes down to "hey they're people, I may think they're different from me somehow or I don't understand something, but that's on me, not them, I fully support their right to exist and be left the fuck alone".
That's it, it really is that simple. Either agree with that basic premise or move on.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:14 AM on April 18 [17 favorites]
At some point, if you agree that trans people are people, you should stop trying to make points and argue stuff.
It literally all comes down to "hey they're people, I may think they're different from me somehow or I don't understand something, but that's on me, not them, I fully support their right to exist and be left the fuck alone".
That's it, it really is that simple. Either agree with that basic premise or move on.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 8:14 AM on April 18 [17 favorites]
the left eating itself.
Even if there was an entire spot on the political spectrum that was making this kind of mistake (there's not), that doesn't change the fact that it is not germane to that thread or this one. This about human rights and not political posturing. If you cannot say it under your own user name, don't say it.
posted by soelo at 8:28 AM on April 18 [16 favorites]
Even if there was an entire spot on the political spectrum that was making this kind of mistake (there's not), that doesn't change the fact that it is not germane to that thread or this one. This about human rights and not political posturing. If you cannot say it under your own user name, don't say it.
posted by soelo at 8:28 AM on April 18 [16 favorites]
Can we please please please
a) Give HonestAlly-sock a timeout
b) Make it clear that if they’re permabanned - which is reasonable for shitting up the transphobic UK court ruling thread as much as they did - then that applies to their non-sock account too
posted by ambrosen at 8:54 AM on April 18 [26 favorites]
a) Give HonestAlly-sock a timeout
b) Make it clear that if they’re permabanned - which is reasonable for shitting up the transphobic UK court ruling thread as much as they did - then that applies to their non-sock account too
posted by ambrosen at 8:54 AM on April 18 [26 favorites]
I do I fully support their right to exist and be left the beep alone, but they're not being left alone by other posters here or the courts and JKR so now we're trying to have a conversation about how to best deal with that, no? Like I feel like you're accusing me of giving the wrong answer to a question that wasn't being asked.
And yes I know the sock puppet owner is perfectly obvious to anyone who cares to look, but I'm pretty sure the standard is to only ban the account not all the person's accounts. So even though I am attempting to respectfully enagage in this conversation and not say anything offensive (at least not on purpose e.g. the spa landmine I hit earlier, sorry about that) I'm also aware this is a sensitive topic and if I fsck up I might get banned, and I don't want to lose my main account over a mistake I make here.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 8:57 AM on April 18
And yes I know the sock puppet owner is perfectly obvious to anyone who cares to look, but I'm pretty sure the standard is to only ban the account not all the person's accounts. So even though I am attempting to respectfully enagage in this conversation and not say anything offensive (at least not on purpose e.g. the spa landmine I hit earlier, sorry about that) I'm also aware this is a sensitive topic and if I fsck up I might get banned, and I don't want to lose my main account over a mistake I make here.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 8:57 AM on April 18
I don’t want to lose june-dodecahedron or fight or flight over you being an utter bigoted arsehole here, and to be frank, that’s more important.
posted by ambrosen at 8:59 AM on April 18 [25 favorites]
posted by ambrosen at 8:59 AM on April 18 [25 favorites]
If the standard is to only ban the sockpuppet account, I'm afraid that standard has to change, otherwise nothing stops someone from creating endless sockpuppets just to shit up threads.
posted by mrgoat at 8:59 AM on April 18 [20 favorites]
posted by mrgoat at 8:59 AM on April 18 [20 favorites]
I'm pretty sure the standard is to only ban the account not all the person's accounts
*lols in moggies-was-robbed*
posted by phunniemee at 8:59 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
*lols in moggies-was-robbed*
posted by phunniemee at 8:59 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
Violating the rules for spare accounts is grounds for banning the spare account and potentially your primary account as well.
I'm pretty sure "sock-puppet as ablative armor to be insensitive to community members while preserving a primary account" is the opposite of the purpose of allowing limited use of sock accounts.
posted by CrystalDave at 9:00 AM on April 18 [28 favorites]
I'm pretty sure "sock-puppet as ablative armor to be insensitive to community members while preserving a primary account" is the opposite of the purpose of allowing limited use of sock accounts.
posted by CrystalDave at 9:00 AM on April 18 [28 favorites]
I don't want to lose my main account over a mistake I make here.
WTH kind of opportunistic bullshit is this? Mods please confiscate their white robe AND their main account
posted by toodleydoodley at 9:08 AM on April 18 [23 favorites]
WTH kind of opportunistic bullshit is this? Mods please confiscate their white robe AND their main account
posted by toodleydoodley at 9:08 AM on April 18 [23 favorites]
If you got a bad opinion you feel so strongly about you want to share it online, just do it from your main. Own your dogshit takes and then grow from them (or not!) over time.
If you're so worried about fucking up by saying the wrong thing, you don't actually have to say anything!
posted by phunniemee at 9:09 AM on April 18 [21 favorites]
If you're so worried about fucking up by saying the wrong thing, you don't actually have to say anything!
posted by phunniemee at 9:09 AM on April 18 [21 favorites]
Anyway I'm sorry I took so much space here and derailed the UK post so much. My apologies to the OP and to anyone I offended. I want trans rights to both matter and actually happen and was trying to move the conversation that way and clearly did not succeed.
I'll go now. But memail me if you're interested in continuing the debate/conversation. I'll pay $100/hour for a phone call or video chat if someone can help me understand how badly fucked this up.
On preview Gerald Bostock, please take me up on that offer, I really really don't know how you got there.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 9:14 AM on April 18
I'll go now. But memail me if you're interested in continuing the debate/conversation. I'll pay $100/hour for a phone call or video chat if someone can help me understand how badly fucked this up.
On preview Gerald Bostock, please take me up on that offer, I really really don't know how you got there.
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 9:14 AM on April 18
you were not trying to have a good-faith conversation about how to respond to the ruling. your argument was that trans people did this to themselves because they didn't cede ground to the bigots who hate them. that is not the argument of an "honest" "ally"
posted by Gerald Bostock at 9:16 AM on April 18 [18 favorites]
posted by Gerald Bostock at 9:16 AM on April 18 [18 favorites]
What the fuck, what is their main account? Just admitting you have a sock so you can gab about issues that don't affect you without fear is fucked up
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:19 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:19 AM on April 18 [11 favorites]
Tiamat
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 9:20 AM on April 18
posted by HonestAlly-sock at 9:20 AM on April 18
Ok I'm leaving for real but the apology should have been from this account in the first place so I'm trying again.
Sorry.
posted by tiamat at 9:24 AM on April 18
Sorry.
posted by tiamat at 9:24 AM on April 18
Such a weird choice.
posted by phunniemee at 9:25 AM on April 18 [3 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 9:25 AM on April 18 [3 favorites]
Creating a separate sock-puppet account in order to play devil's advocate for bigotry specifically on a thread about the real world effects of that bigotry is classic trolling behavior. It is fundamentally anti-social and anti-community and both the sock and any other accounts belonging to that user should be banned. Flagged with note, holy moly.
posted by radiogreentea at 9:25 AM on April 18 [28 favorites]
posted by radiogreentea at 9:25 AM on April 18 [28 favorites]
Creating a separate sock-puppet account in order to play devil's advocate for bigotry specifically on a thread about the real world effects of that bigotry is classic trolling behavior.
It's also something with a specific and shitty history on MetaTalk, in a thread also about trans issues. It is a bad fucking plan. If you aren't comfortable with the reaction you expect to get when you air your opinions about a minority to which you do not belong, it is a good idea to not air those opinions.
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 9:44 AM on April 18 [19 favorites]
It's also something with a specific and shitty history on MetaTalk, in a thread also about trans issues. It is a bad fucking plan. If you aren't comfortable with the reaction you expect to get when you air your opinions about a minority to which you do not belong, it is a good idea to not air those opinions.
posted by restless_nomad (retired) at 9:44 AM on April 18 [19 favorites]
hey remember when tiamat told me i was lowering the quality of the conversation
posted by secret about box at 10:02 AM on April 18 [22 favorites]
posted by secret about box at 10:02 AM on April 18 [22 favorites]
MetaFilter: I'll pay $100/hour for a phone call or video chat if someone can help me understand how badly fucked this up.
posted by Klipspringer at 10:11 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by Klipspringer at 10:11 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
anyway, if i see transphobia in someone's profile i'm pasting it into the thread and telling them to fuck off. may as well ban me now if that's a no-no norms violation
posted by secret about box at 10:13 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
posted by secret about box at 10:13 AM on April 18 [15 favorites]
Thank you to FoF and june and all the trans users who keep hollering and making noise here. Imo this thread was directly responsible for the swift mod actions on the folks who crapped up that thread while I was asleep, and the swift mod actions to deal with Tiamat's Very Dumb Idea today. I don't believe for a second that any of those folks (or the margarita person) would have got banned on this timespan if y'all hadn't been out here vocally demanding respect.
posted by phunniemee at 10:19 AM on April 18 [27 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 10:19 AM on April 18 [27 favorites]
Marduk was here
posted by aws17576 at 10:38 AM on April 18 [6 favorites]
posted by aws17576 at 10:38 AM on April 18 [6 favorites]
Wait, has there been any mod action? I'm just catching up now but it looks like the sock accounts shitty comments are all still up, they were permitted to dominate the thread with their cis dullardry, and they left of their own accord. Someone correct me if I'm missing something
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:46 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 11:46 AM on April 18 [7 favorites]
That's my understanding too.
posted by Klipspringer at 11:48 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by Klipspringer at 11:48 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
Tiamat's accounts are both marked as closed... You're right I guess I don't know if they left on their own or were banned. I just assumed banned because their user profile looks the same as e.g. Czjewel's. I think there has been a comment or two in the UK thread requesting to leave the sock comments up as an illustration of this problem.
posted by phunniemee at 11:54 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by phunniemee at 11:54 AM on April 18 [1 favorite]
An official mod comment explaining if Tiamat button'd themselves, or if the mods fell down yet again would be appropriate here.
posted by mrgoat at 11:58 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by mrgoat at 11:58 AM on April 18 [2 favorites]
I should clarify, I'm agnostic on whether their comments should have been deleted or not, but it’s interesting that they seemed to have received no pushback from mods, only from other users. If that's just down to a lack of coverage than fine, but if there was coverage then I'd like to know why tiamat/sock was allowed to center their idiocy in that thread for so long
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:03 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:03 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Account deletion aside, part of the reason they were allowed to center themselves in that thread was the fact that other commenters were constantly talking about/to them (and in this post as well, which is now all about them, for some reason). Next time, more flagging and moving on, less making smart/snarky comments when it's clear the post is being derailed and centered around some cis person's feelings.
posted by fight or flight at 12:10 PM on April 18 [5 favorites]
posted by fight or flight at 12:10 PM on April 18 [5 favorites]
If only they'd heeded my command to piss off, maybe this all could have been avoided
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:13 PM on April 18 [11 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:13 PM on April 18 [11 favorites]
If the standard is to only ban the sockpuppet account, I'm afraid that standard has to change, otherwise nothing stops someone from creating endless sockpuppets just to shit up threads.
This sort of happened 10 or so years ago when a member who’d said some very TERFy things showed up in a trans-oriented MeTa after talking the mods into giving them a sock puppet because they were afraid of backlash from the evil trans cabal. The sock puppet got nuked after a couple of comments when the mods realized they’d been duped, and the presumed perpetrator (at least I assumed it was her) buttoned almost immediately. I don’t think it was the thread that restless_nomad linked, but it was about that time.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:35 PM on April 18 [9 favorites]
This sort of happened 10 or so years ago when a member who’d said some very TERFy things showed up in a trans-oriented MeTa after talking the mods into giving them a sock puppet because they were afraid of backlash from the evil trans cabal. The sock puppet got nuked after a couple of comments when the mods realized they’d been duped, and the presumed perpetrator (at least I assumed it was her) buttoned almost immediately. I don’t think it was the thread that restless_nomad linked, but it was about that time.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:35 PM on April 18 [9 favorites]
*pokes my head in*
lol. lmao. i'm glad i've been reducing my time here dramatically.
some thoughts:
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:14 PM on April 18 [12 favorites]
lol. lmao. i'm glad i've been reducing my time here dramatically.
some thoughts:
- on a trans advisory board: yes, i know the idea has been raised. given how much of a bang-on success the bipoc advisory board has been, it couldn't hurt. it won't help at all, but it couldn't hurt. (i'm channeling the midwestern polite rudeness of an ex-mod here. in actuality, i have zero fucking faith that any advisory board can help the situation, given how poorly, shambolically mishandled the bipoc board was by the staff on this site. two fucking years for minutes. feckless shit here.)
- on being a trans-friendly site: i'm sure you want that. we all want that. but when you have an enormous part of this thread dealing with some shitty user being all "swearing is bad" and then fucking up the air with a sock that repeats and tries to justify anti-trans talking points that bear absolutely no semblance to reality, while shitting on trans users who, after decades of this site falling down on providing such a safe space, after decades where trans users have to flag repeatedly and wave our hands, all while rights are being eroded and propagandists use us as a convenient scapegoat? lol. lmao. "trans-friendly" in the same way target corp supports "dei initiatives". i'll bring it up again. this little bit of transphobia is still here. the original poster apologized and agrees that offending bit should be removed. and yet. the proof is in the fucking pudding. why should any trans person believe or feel this place is "friendly"? at best this place is only 3.6 röntgen levels of not great/not terrible, as opposed to twitter or british media.
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:14 PM on April 18 [12 favorites]
No, the MBS incident was that thread. I had thought that more lessons had been learned from how that ended up, but maybe not? Similarly, in the tully_monster thread linked above, I thought that letting bigoted comments go by with a note that MeFites in the targeted communities can push back was [not] the useful way to go, but I guess not.
posted by JiBB at 2:20 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
posted by JiBB at 2:20 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Thanks, I’m on my phone and searching long threads is not really possible. That was the exact incident.
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:31 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by GenjiandProust at 2:31 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
This sort of happened 10 or so years ago when a member who’d said some very TERFy things showed up in a trans-oriented MeTa
This all feels like that meme with the guy flipping the calendar back to 1984 or whatever.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:34 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
This all feels like that meme with the guy flipping the calendar back to 1984 or whatever.
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:34 PM on April 18 [2 favorites]
Coffee mug wife: there's some transphobic nonsense on metafilter!
Dumb calendar husband: [flips to... idk, any given month in the last twenty-five years or so]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:43 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
Dumb calendar husband: [flips to... idk, any given month in the last twenty-five years or so]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 2:43 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
Mod note: mrgoat: "An official mod comment explaining if Tiamat button'd themselves..."
They did indeed button the main and sock puppet account themselves.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:45 PM on April 18
They did indeed button the main and sock puppet account themselves.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 3:45 PM on April 18
The fuck you conversation is giving real “kid tells their bully to shut up and then both of them get sent to the office” energy. There are a lot of fictional high school scenes out there highlighting why this is bad, actually.
posted by brook horse at 4:32 PM on April 18 [16 favorites]
posted by brook horse at 4:32 PM on April 18 [16 favorites]
Anyway I think the idea of the left eating their own is literally what’s happening to trans people. Telling a trans person that they need to be more polite when they are being attacked on all sides is why so many trans people leave leftist spaces and disengage from political communities. By saying this you’re implicitly stating you would rather the transphobe stay than the trans person.
posted by brook horse at 4:45 PM on April 18 [18 favorites]
posted by brook horse at 4:45 PM on April 18 [18 favorites]
I've been lurking this site for what must be 10 or 11 years now, and never made an account, but this whole thing has pissed me off so bad that I'm going to spend 5 bucks to come in here and vent my spleen. So, hi. Bad circumstances but hi.
I'm trans and one of the big reasons I have not ever made an account is that this place, while full of wonderful and well-researched posts and interesting people and occasionally good political conversations, has always been kind of centrist in the worst self-congratulatory way. That way where when something isn't really about you, but you don't know how to not center yourself in a conversation, it feels really good to magnanimously play host to a lively intellectual debate! And then people come in all angry and shouty and you boot them because why on earth are they getting so worked up in this marketplace for the free exchange of ideas! But what is always missed is that the ones shouting are the ones actually affected by the shit you're having a high-minded debate about. And when it isn't really about you, you're very likely talking out your ass. For example- the folks trying in good faith to argue with Tiamat but accepting the premise offered up thread that "The left overshot by insisting on forcing the issue and this is the inevitable backlash." This is just... blatantly false. The "Left" (and I'm being very generous saying Labour or even Dems count as "Left" here) had nothing to do with this court case. This court case did not come about in reaction to some overreach- show me a single policy Labour has pushed in favor of trans people, at all! Dems and Labour have been abandoning trans people left and right as fast as their consultants can generate polls. This specific opinion is a calculated wedge, designed to give cover to cis people who "Secretly" feel that all this trans nonsense has gone too far but are Voting Blue No Matter Who. They want you to say to yourself "Hey, yeah! Trans people make me uncomfortable, and that discomfort is probably what's motivating these laws." They want you to accept the argument that trans people are a liability. If this is the first time you've been in the conversation, you might not recognize this rhetorical trick! But the thing is every trans person in the thread knows exactly what this dog-whistle means and is pissed the fuck off about it. If you don't understand why they all got mad all of a sudden, then you're probably not versed enough on the conversation to be speaking.
And the other part is, half the counter-arguments from well meaning cis people in these debates... I'd rather just be called a slur. "Trans women are invading women's sports" is not effectively countered by "Well gosh, there aren't even that many of them! We should leave it to the sporting bodies." That is accepting the premise- you have accepted that you can't fight on the merits, that maybe trans women do have an unfair advantage, because in your heart trans people make you uncomfortable. Are you picking up the theme? "Okay yeah trans people are gross and I don't really see them as women either but it's not that big of an issue," and "Okay yeah trans people are gross and that's why we keep losing politically when we defend them." It's all of a piece- if you are arguing for trans rights from a place where you haven't dealt with your own sense of discomfort about trans people, please stop and just listen. Trans women aren't invading women's sports. We can't invade, because we're women. Women's sports are our home ground. If a trans woman's body is better at a sport than a cis woman's, then I guess some women's bodies are better at that sport. And if that's a major imbalancing factor we should find some ways to regulate around body types, like weight classes, or fucking wingspan, or whatever, instead of chromosomes! If you think trans women are only acceptable in women's sport as long as we're unexceptional, it kinda sounds like you fundamentally agree with the bigots that we're not who we say we are, but you're trying a really mealy-mouthed legalese defense, and you maybe should shut the fuck up.
And all this is to say nothing about a person coming in on a sock puppet to "Just ask questions" on the back of yet another historic loss of rights and then turning around to tone-police the hell out of enraged minority members who are sick to fucking death of having their humanity dispassionately debated. I logged on to read this thread today after having spent three hours at my bank to try and get an international wire transfer going to get some estradiol raws from a pharmacy in China, so I could have a source on hand for homebrew HRT, because there is every chance that within the next year the HHS is going to fuck our access to the hormones that literally keep us alive. My driver's license gender marker got flipped back this year when I went to renew, and I managed to get a passport with the right marker just weeks before they slammed that door too. I am watching the current legislative session for my state because there's an attempt filtering through it to weaponize human rights laws against any place of business that employs me, saying that my merely existing around a women's bathroom is a violation of the rights of cis women. They've already made it completely illegal to give gender affirming care to anyone under 19 in my state. That's where I'm at, that's how my days are going. People in my community are losing their jobs, they're losing their housing, they are being subjected to withering hate on a daily basis. And then I pop on here and I see a billionaire TERF celebrating this unbelievable miscarriage of justice and some motherfucker going "Well actually The Left should accept this is a losing issue and we should throw some trans women in men's prisons, as a treat." The sheer, seething level of vitriol that I feel, reading a thing like that- I am astonished at the restraint it must have taken that "Go fuck yourself" was the nastiest shot anyone fired back.
You want to know what a safe space for a minority looks like? Here are some simple ideas:
* Mods recognize decorum is a weapon most commonly wielded in bad faith to shut down anyone with skin in the game. A dispassionate intellectual debate about the rights of people being hurt right now, by folks who have never known anyone in the affected community, is not a lofty ideal- it is a failure state. If a TERF and a trans person walk into a thread about trans rights, the mods understand that only one person there is actively arguing for their life and right to exist.
* Threads about any minority issue are not treated as a place to present the political talking points du jour, but to actually talk to and learn from the real-ass human beings affected. Some surprisingly educational conversations may result- and it may turn out that the real-ass human beings don't really like Blue Team's take on the subject any more than Red Team's, and when that happens it's time to listen and learn, not grumble about how a given minority may deserve whatever revenge fantasy tickles the poster because they didn't vote properly.
* Conversations about minorities also do not center the right-most person in the thread. People do not spend all their time trying to dunk on, refute, convince, or otherwise give more oxygen to whatever asshole has decided to show up and justify oppression today. The community is capable of flagging those people for clean-up and moving on with productive conversations. People "Just wanting to be convinced" that Palestinians aren't all terrorists or trans people aren't all rapists trying to sneak into women's prisons can take time to educate themselves, they do not need well-meaning allies to drown out the affected minority for another argument.
* Threads about the minority group can be uplifting- some substantial portion of posts involving said minority are uplifting and engaging instead of just newsfilter posts about the latest exchange of fire in the awful, stupid culture war. Minority folks are uplifted and allowed to exist at their best and most human, not just in their worst and most desperate moments.
Ultimately what I'm driving at here, and the reason I am engaging today, is that I think Metafilter as a community is capable of more. It's heartening to see how differently all of this went than it would have gone ten years ago. But the community needs to abandon some of the concepts of decorum that it's held onto for so long. If you were paying attention today, you got a front-row seat to exactly how those ideals are being used to present wedges, attack, and drive out the most vulnerable people in a conversation.
posted by Seven Deadly Gins at 10:13 PM on April 18 [19 favorites]
I'm trans and one of the big reasons I have not ever made an account is that this place, while full of wonderful and well-researched posts and interesting people and occasionally good political conversations, has always been kind of centrist in the worst self-congratulatory way. That way where when something isn't really about you, but you don't know how to not center yourself in a conversation, it feels really good to magnanimously play host to a lively intellectual debate! And then people come in all angry and shouty and you boot them because why on earth are they getting so worked up in this marketplace for the free exchange of ideas! But what is always missed is that the ones shouting are the ones actually affected by the shit you're having a high-minded debate about. And when it isn't really about you, you're very likely talking out your ass. For example- the folks trying in good faith to argue with Tiamat but accepting the premise offered up thread that "The left overshot by insisting on forcing the issue and this is the inevitable backlash." This is just... blatantly false. The "Left" (and I'm being very generous saying Labour or even Dems count as "Left" here) had nothing to do with this court case. This court case did not come about in reaction to some overreach- show me a single policy Labour has pushed in favor of trans people, at all! Dems and Labour have been abandoning trans people left and right as fast as their consultants can generate polls. This specific opinion is a calculated wedge, designed to give cover to cis people who "Secretly" feel that all this trans nonsense has gone too far but are Voting Blue No Matter Who. They want you to say to yourself "Hey, yeah! Trans people make me uncomfortable, and that discomfort is probably what's motivating these laws." They want you to accept the argument that trans people are a liability. If this is the first time you've been in the conversation, you might not recognize this rhetorical trick! But the thing is every trans person in the thread knows exactly what this dog-whistle means and is pissed the fuck off about it. If you don't understand why they all got mad all of a sudden, then you're probably not versed enough on the conversation to be speaking.
And the other part is, half the counter-arguments from well meaning cis people in these debates... I'd rather just be called a slur. "Trans women are invading women's sports" is not effectively countered by "Well gosh, there aren't even that many of them! We should leave it to the sporting bodies." That is accepting the premise- you have accepted that you can't fight on the merits, that maybe trans women do have an unfair advantage, because in your heart trans people make you uncomfortable. Are you picking up the theme? "Okay yeah trans people are gross and I don't really see them as women either but it's not that big of an issue," and "Okay yeah trans people are gross and that's why we keep losing politically when we defend them." It's all of a piece- if you are arguing for trans rights from a place where you haven't dealt with your own sense of discomfort about trans people, please stop and just listen. Trans women aren't invading women's sports. We can't invade, because we're women. Women's sports are our home ground. If a trans woman's body is better at a sport than a cis woman's, then I guess some women's bodies are better at that sport. And if that's a major imbalancing factor we should find some ways to regulate around body types, like weight classes, or fucking wingspan, or whatever, instead of chromosomes! If you think trans women are only acceptable in women's sport as long as we're unexceptional, it kinda sounds like you fundamentally agree with the bigots that we're not who we say we are, but you're trying a really mealy-mouthed legalese defense, and you maybe should shut the fuck up.
And all this is to say nothing about a person coming in on a sock puppet to "Just ask questions" on the back of yet another historic loss of rights and then turning around to tone-police the hell out of enraged minority members who are sick to fucking death of having their humanity dispassionately debated. I logged on to read this thread today after having spent three hours at my bank to try and get an international wire transfer going to get some estradiol raws from a pharmacy in China, so I could have a source on hand for homebrew HRT, because there is every chance that within the next year the HHS is going to fuck our access to the hormones that literally keep us alive. My driver's license gender marker got flipped back this year when I went to renew, and I managed to get a passport with the right marker just weeks before they slammed that door too. I am watching the current legislative session for my state because there's an attempt filtering through it to weaponize human rights laws against any place of business that employs me, saying that my merely existing around a women's bathroom is a violation of the rights of cis women. They've already made it completely illegal to give gender affirming care to anyone under 19 in my state. That's where I'm at, that's how my days are going. People in my community are losing their jobs, they're losing their housing, they are being subjected to withering hate on a daily basis. And then I pop on here and I see a billionaire TERF celebrating this unbelievable miscarriage of justice and some motherfucker going "Well actually The Left should accept this is a losing issue and we should throw some trans women in men's prisons, as a treat." The sheer, seething level of vitriol that I feel, reading a thing like that- I am astonished at the restraint it must have taken that "Go fuck yourself" was the nastiest shot anyone fired back.
You want to know what a safe space for a minority looks like? Here are some simple ideas:
* Mods recognize decorum is a weapon most commonly wielded in bad faith to shut down anyone with skin in the game. A dispassionate intellectual debate about the rights of people being hurt right now, by folks who have never known anyone in the affected community, is not a lofty ideal- it is a failure state. If a TERF and a trans person walk into a thread about trans rights, the mods understand that only one person there is actively arguing for their life and right to exist.
* Threads about any minority issue are not treated as a place to present the political talking points du jour, but to actually talk to and learn from the real-ass human beings affected. Some surprisingly educational conversations may result- and it may turn out that the real-ass human beings don't really like Blue Team's take on the subject any more than Red Team's, and when that happens it's time to listen and learn, not grumble about how a given minority may deserve whatever revenge fantasy tickles the poster because they didn't vote properly.
* Conversations about minorities also do not center the right-most person in the thread. People do not spend all their time trying to dunk on, refute, convince, or otherwise give more oxygen to whatever asshole has decided to show up and justify oppression today. The community is capable of flagging those people for clean-up and moving on with productive conversations. People "Just wanting to be convinced" that Palestinians aren't all terrorists or trans people aren't all rapists trying to sneak into women's prisons can take time to educate themselves, they do not need well-meaning allies to drown out the affected minority for another argument.
* Threads about the minority group can be uplifting- some substantial portion of posts involving said minority are uplifting and engaging instead of just newsfilter posts about the latest exchange of fire in the awful, stupid culture war. Minority folks are uplifted and allowed to exist at their best and most human, not just in their worst and most desperate moments.
Ultimately what I'm driving at here, and the reason I am engaging today, is that I think Metafilter as a community is capable of more. It's heartening to see how differently all of this went than it would have gone ten years ago. But the community needs to abandon some of the concepts of decorum that it's held onto for so long. If you were paying attention today, you got a front-row seat to exactly how those ideals are being used to present wedges, attack, and drive out the most vulnerable people in a conversation.
posted by Seven Deadly Gins at 10:13 PM on April 18 [19 favorites]
I'll second the muttered "I wish people didn't lose their minds about trans" remark I made earlier somewhere, again. And I wouldn't be surprised if every trans person on MeFi stomped off in a rage. I really wish we weren't heading towards that cliff, but we sure do seem to be.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:54 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:54 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
I'm just going to draw a big circle around Seven Deadly Gins' comment here and Will Smith meme at it. Flagged as fantastic.
posted by fight or flight at 11:31 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
posted by fight or flight at 11:31 PM on April 18 [3 favorites]
Seven Deadly Gins, your comment made my night. 100% in agreement, and well said.
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 11:59 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
posted by She Vaped An Entire Sock! at 11:59 PM on April 18 [1 favorite]
thank you Seven Deadly Gins. i am struggling to think of better words to say other than “nailed it” and “wow” and “YES”. put that post verbatim into the mefi bylaws. flagged as fantastic
posted by crime online at 12:01 AM on April 19 [2 favorites]
posted by crime online at 12:01 AM on April 19 [2 favorites]
Wow. Now that's a great comment. Flagged as fantastic
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:08 AM on April 19 [2 favorites]
posted by june_dodecahedron at 12:08 AM on April 19 [2 favorites]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by phunniemee at 9:28 AM on April 16 [24 favorites]